ERKELEY 

LIBRARY 

UNIVERSITY  OP 
CALIFORNIA 


,^>»^»a^«u^_ 


6f\ 


(^^-^ 


tvab 


^-^THBIllS.^^ 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/christianapologeOOdevirich 


A.  LIBS^^^^, 


P.V 


TV 


v'-V  -^.'^ 


CHEISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 


^' 


CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS 

A   DEFENSE  OF  THE  CATHOLIC  FAITH 


BY 

Rev.  W.  DEVIYIER,  S.J. 


EDITED  BY 

The  Rt.  Rev.  S.  G.  MESSMER,  D.D.,  D.C.L., 

Bishop  of  Green  Bay^  Wis, 


'S 


New  York,  Cincin-n-att,  Chicago: 
Senziger    Brothers, 

Printers  to  the  Eoly  Apostolic  See. 


ITniprimatur^ 


•f.  JOHN  M.  FARLEY, 

Archbishop  of  New  York. 


LOAN  STACK 


New  York.  April  15,  1903. 


Copyright,  1903,  by  Benziger  Brothers. 


Dh-6 


TO   THE 

CATHOLIC    READING   CIRCLES 

OF   THE 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 

BY 

THE  EDITOR. 


f       935 


EDITOR'S  PREFACE. 


If  it  be  true  that  a  book  well  recommended  by  competent 
critics  is  sure  of  a  hearty  welcome  from  thoughtful  readers,  the 
present  volume  will  find  favor  with  the  Catholic  pubhc.  Dur- 
ing the  fifteen  years  of  its  existence  the  French  original  has 
passed  through  twelve  editions.  It  has  been  praised  by  the 
CathoUc  press  and  has  received  a  flattering  recognition  on  the 
part  of  cardinals  and  prelates.  Thus  Cardinal  Mazzella  wrote 
to  the  author :  ' '  You  unite  with  soundness  of  doctrine  the  clear- 
ness of  exposition  which  the  intelligence  of  the  pupil  requires, 
and  you  treat  your  subjects  with  the  reserve  necessary  to  permit 
the  professor  to  add  his  own  developments.  I  hope  that  your 
work  will  become  a  classic  jtext-bopk  to  the  great  advantage 
of  students.  People  of^tEe"  world  will  also  read  it  with  profit 
and  pleasure." 

Cardinal  Deprez,  Archbishop  of  Toulouse,  writes:  "You 
have  given  us  in  a  very  clear  and  concise  form  an  excellent 
summary  of  fundamental  theology.  Not  only  the  pupils  for 
whom  your  work  is  more  specially  intended,  but  all  educated 
men,  desirous  to  complete  their  religious  studies,  will  read  it 
with  profit.  They  will  learn  from  its  substantial  pages  to 
recognize  the  basis  upon  which  all  Christian  dogma  rests;  they 
will  see  that  if  faith  is  frequently  represented  as  blindfolded, 
yet  she  is  not  wholly  blind,  and  that  before  giving  her  full  assent 
to  revealed  truth,  she  makes  sure  that  she  is  not  the  victim  of 
a  pious  illusion.  I  commend  you  for  having  added  to  your 
dogmatic  proofs  a  few  of  the  objections  against  religion  and 
the  Church  by  which,  unfortunately,  many  unthinking  minds 
are  influenced.  Your  very  clear  and  always  accurate  explana- 
tions will  destroy  fatal  misunderstandings  in  men  of  good  faith." 

Cardinal  Mermillod,  Bishop  of  Lausanne  and  Geneva,  writes: 
"It  is  a _. compendium,  so  to  speak,  in  which  the  proofs  of  the 
divinity  of  the  Christian  religion  and  the  Catholic  Church  are 
compactly  grouped  and  forcibly  presented.  But  if,  like  the 
Jews  rebuilding  Jerusalem,  you  keep  the  trowel  in  one  hand, 
the  sword  is  in  the  other;  you  refute  victoriously  in  the  name 
of  science  the  objections  against  the  books  of  Moses,  and  in  the 


4  EDITOR  S   PREFACE. 

name  of  history  the  accusations  frequently  launched  against 
the  Catholic  Church.  In  defence  of  the  books  of  Moses  and  to 
show  the  harmony  which  exists  between  the  Pentateuch  and 
geology  or  profane  history,  you  have  summed  up  long  works, 
among  others  the  learned  folios  of  the  Abbe  Vigouroux.  Your 
manner  of  stating  questions  enables  you  to  refute  in  advance 
objections  not  yet  stated,  but  which  may  arise  later.  You 
have  facilitated  the  task  of  apologist  for  yourself  in  your  authori- 
tative work  by  ever  bearing  in  mind  St.  Augustine's  principle: 
In  necessaris  unitas,  in  duhiis  lihertas,  in  omnibus  caritas.  Your 
book  is  characterized  by  method,  lucidity,  accurateness,  and 
conciseness;  and  one  recognizes  in  its  pages  the  work  of  an 
eloquent  professor." 

Cardinal  Place,  Archbishop  of  Rennes,  writes:  "  It  is  a  most 
opportune  work  to  enable  young  men  and  men  of  the  world  to 
justify  their  faith  to  themselves  and  to  others,  and  to  be  con- 
vinced that  it  is  not  the  believer  but  the  sceptic  who  is  con- 
demned by  sound  reason.  The  more  science,  deviating  from 
its  proper  sphere,  seems  to  encroach  upon  the  domain  of  re- 
ligion, the  more  important  it  is  that  faith  be  equipped  with 
learning.  Your  excellent  work  will  efficaciously  contribute  to 
this  end." 

Mgr.  Fontenau,  Archbishop  of  Albi,  writes :  "  Under  a  modest 
title  and  in  a  simple  and  unpretentious  form  you  have  united 
in  a  single  volume  all  the  arguments  which  Catholic  controversy 
opposes  to  contemporary  irreUgion.  Exegesis,  philosophy, 
theology,  history,  physical  sciences,  political  economy,  all 
branches  of  knowledge,  human  and  divine,  concur  in  your  work 
to  demonstrate  incontestably  the  perfect  agreement  of  reason 
and  faith.  The  proofs  are  abundant,  well  chosen,  and  well 
presented,  the  arguments  nervous  and  powerful,  the  style  clear, 
sober,  and  precise.  .  .  .  Your  Course  of  Christian  Apologetics, 
therefore,  is  not  only  an  instructive  book,  it  is  also  a  finished 
model  of  methodical  exposition  and  learned  discussion.  For 
these  reasons  it  is  truly  a  most  valuable  work.  Therefore  I 
should  like  to  see  it  in  the  library  of  my  seminarians  and  priests ; 
they  will  find  in  it  all  the  elements  of  CathoUc  controversy  and 
learn  from  it  how  to  use  them." 

Mgr.  Vigne,  Archbishop  of  Avignon,  writes:  "I  shall  recom- 
mend it  the  more  wilhngly  that,  in  my  opinion,  it  meets  the 
needs  of  our  time,  and  that,  in  addition  to  its  being  incontestably 
opportune,  it  has  the  essential  merit  of  clearness,  soHdity  of 
doctrine,  and  brevity.  Ignorance  of  the  truths  of  rehgion  is  the 
great  evil  of  our  day,  and  undoubtedly  one  of  the  chief  causes 
of  the  weakening  of  the  faith  among  us.  Therefore,  Rev. 
Father,  I  should  like  to  see  your  book  in  the  hands  of  all  young 
people." 


EDITOR  S   PREFACE.  5 

Mgr.  Sebaux,  Bishop  of  Angouleme,  writes:  "I  am  happy  to 
unite  my  suffrage  with  that  of  my  venerable  colleagues.  The 
book  is  so  clear,  so  well  arranged,  and  so  suited  to  the  condition 
of  minds  of  the  present  day  that  it  will  render  most  valuable 
service.  I  shall  gladly  recommend  it,  and  I  earnestly  desire  to 
see  it  not  only  in  the  hands  of  the  most  advanced  pupils  of  our 
institutions,  but  also  of  men  of  letters,  whom  a  defective  religious 
training  has  left  in  ignorance  of  the  decisive  reasons  of  our  faith, 
or  who  are  in  a  state  of  doubt  created  by  objections  which  they 
know  not  how  to  answer." 

Mgr.  Isoard,  Bishop  of  Annecy,  writes:  ''The  author  has 
written  for  the  pupils  of  the  higher  classes,  and  his  book  will 
certainly  furnish  the  clearest  and  most  complete  text  for  the 
lessons  of  the  catechist  and  the  conferences  of  the  preacher. 
But  many  others  of  the  faithful  will  derive  notable  profit  from 
an  assiduous  and  careful  reading  of  this  manual.  The  students 
of  philosophy  and  theology  in  our  large  seminaries  will  owe  to 
this  study  the  power  of  being  able  later  to  translate  into  language 
corresponding  to  the  needs  of  the  faithful  the  teaching  which 
they  have  received  in  the  dry,  severe  formulas  of  the  language 
of  the  Church.  I  would  urge  the  fathers  and  mothers  of  the 
pupils  in  our  educational  houses  or  in  our  seminaries  to  procure 
first  for  themselves  this  book,  which  they  should  desire  to  see 
in  the  hands  of  their  children,  to  acquire  a  thorough  knowledge 
of  it,  to  study  it  profoundly:  the  study  of  reUgion  is  one  of  their 
first  duties." 

The  gist  of  these  and  numerous  other  recommendations  may 
be  given  in  the  words  of  Mgr.  Rosset,  Bishop  of  Maurienne,  who 
writes :  "I  consider  that  the  work  has  all  the  merits  required 
for  a  classic.  Pupils  in  our  houses  of  secondary  education  will 
study  it  with  fruit;  the  clergy  cannot  read  it  without  deriving 
great  advantage;  the  educated  will  find  in  it  weapons  of  defence 
if  they  are  true  Catholics,  or  reasons  for  abandoning  their  errors  if 
they  are  the  victims  of  prejudice.  To  guide  souls  toward  the 
Catholic  faith,  to  confirm  in  the  mind  the  reasons  of  our  belief, 
to  do  good  to  those  who  believe  and  to  those  who  do  not  believe — 
such  are  the  results  to  which  P.  Devivier's  Course  of  Christian 
Apologetics  will  largely  contribute." 

Modem  infidelity,  armed  with  the  sophisms  of  rationalism, 
scepticism,  naturalism,  and  materialism,  attempts  to  undermine 
the  very  foundations  of  Christianity.  The  battle  is  no  longer 
confined  to  the  campus  of  academic  and  scientific  schools;  it 
spreads  over  the  wide  field  of  popular  education  and  literature. 
The  same  may  be  said  of  those  strange  aberrations  of  Spiritism, 
Christian  Science,  Theosophy,  and  a  lot  of  similar  religious  fads 
which,  like  so  many  mental  plagues,  begin  to  attack  the  masses 
of  the  people.     "  The  need  of  defending  the  integrity  of  Chris- 


6  editor's  preface. 

tian  faith  and  morality  was  never  greater  than  it  is  to-day, 
when  nearly  every  doctrine  which  the  Saviour  of  man,  Jesus 
Christ,  entrusted  to  the  Church  for  the  welfare  of  mankind, 
is  assailed  in  deadly  strife  by  an  unbridled  license  of  mind 
and  heart.  Various,  indeed,  and  unlimited  is  the  cunning  and 
artfulness  of  the  enemy  in  this  battle;  but  first  and  full  of 
danger  is  the  immoderate  mania  of  writing  and  of  spreading 
wicked  literature  among  the  people.  We  cannot  think  of 
anything  more  perniciously  calculated  to  effect  the  ruin  of 
souls  by  instilling  into  them  a  contempt  of  religion  and 
deluding  them  with  the  false  charms  of  sin.''  (Leo  XIII.,  Const. 
on  forbidden  books,  Jan.  25,  1897.)  Under  such  conditions 
it  becomes  a  positive  duty  of  intelligent  Catholics  to  get  more 
fully  acquainted  with  the  solid  grounds  of  their  faith  in  the 
divine  character  of  the  Catholic  Church,  the  concrete  realiza- 
tion of  Christianity,  and  to  apprehend  more  clearly  the  worth- 
lessness  of  infidel  and  sectarian  opposition.  In  this  connec- 
tion we  may  call  attention  to  some  other  weighty  words  of  our 
Holy  Father.  In  his  encyclical  ^'On  the  Means  of  Preserving 
the  Faith  among  the  People"  (Feb.  15,  1882),  Leo  XIII. 
mentions  books  written  in  defence  of  the  Catholic  rehgion: 
"  Books  must  be  fought  by  books;  the  skill  and  art  from  which 
the  greatest  harm  may  come  must  be  turned  to  work  the 
salvation  and  welfare  of  man;  the  source  from  whence  evil 
poison  is  sought  must  be  made  to  yield  the  remedy."  The 
Pope  then  calls  upon  Catholic  writers  to  make  pubhcly  known 
the  claims  of  the  Church  upon  every  Christian,  to  display  the 
splendid  works  accomplished  by  her  among  all  nations,  to  set 
forth  the  blessings  she  brings  upon  individuals  as  well  as  upon 
society,  and  finally  to  demonstrate  the  importance  of  giving 
the  Church  that  position  in  society  which  her  divinely-given 
dignity  and  the  pubhc  welfare  of  the  State  demand.  But  the 
Pope  also  admonishes  the  Catholic  people  to  encourage  CathoHc 
writers  by  its  hearty  co-operation  in  spreading  their  books: 
''  For  all  those  who  truly  and  sincerely  desire  progress  in 
Church  and  State,  whose  interests  must  be  defended  by  the 
writings  of  bright  minds,  it  becomes  a  duty  to  insure  by  their 
liberality  the  success  of  these  writers." 

Observe  that  in  the  above  words  the  Pope  evidently  appHes 
to  the  defence  of  the  Church  the  words  of  Christ:  '' By  their 
fruits  you  shall  know  them."  For,  as  Father  Tyrrell,  S.J., 
beautifully  explains  (Introd.  to  "The  Faith  of  MiUions"), 
"  the  mere  reasonableness  of  believing  cannot  stir  the  will " 
to  actual  belief.  Rehgion  must  draw  the  heart  unto  itself 
not  by  its  truth  alone,  but  stiU  more  by  its  goodness  and 
beauty.  Only  when  man  perceives  that  faith  is  able  to  bring 
happiness,  peace,  and  dehght  to  his  soul  will  he  accept  it  with 


EDITOR  S    PREFACE.  7 

a  willing  mind.  This  power  of  religion  for  good  and  its 
spiritual  beauty  must  be  shown  principally  by  its  fruits.  In 
this  regard  what  Father  Tyrrell  says  (1.  c.)  of  England  applies 
equally  to  America.  ''  Nowhere  more  than  in  businessUke 
England,  where  the  distrust  of  dialectic  is  so  profound  and  the 
appeal  to  palpable  results  so  decisive,  have  we  need  to  strengthen 
this  argument  ex  fructihus,  if  we  are  to  draw  others  or  keep 
those  we  have.  If  believers  are,  as  a  rule,  notably  more 
just,  truthful,  charitable,  beneficent,  and  temperate  than  un- 
believers; if  invisible,  supernatural  virtue  is  thus  proved  to 
include,  presuppose,  strengthen,  and  refine  that  which  is  natural 
and  visible,  to  be  a  light  shining  before  men,  and  not  merely  before 
God,  then  the  apologist  may  enter  hopefully  upon  his  labors." 

Devivier's  Manual  sets  forth  both  the  truth  and  the  goodness 
of  the  Catholic  religion.  Although  very  compendious  in  size 
and  treatment,  it  is  sufficiently  complete  for  popular  use.  It  is 
especially  suitable  for  our  Catholic  Reading  Circles.  We  are 
under  the  impression  (if  wrongly,  so  much  the  better)  that  in 
many  Reading  Circles  and  other  Catholic  literary  clubs  too 
much  time  is  spent  upon  secular  literature  and  history;  time 
and  labor  that  would  be  applied  with  far  greater  profit,  intel- 
lectual, moral,  and  religious,  to  the  study  of  the  Catholic  religion, 
its  dogmas  and  laws,  its  liturgy  and  pious  practices,  its  history 
and  literature.  In  our  opinion  a  systematic  course  of  short 
essays  in  the  form  of  plain  exposition  or  of  apologetic  discussion 
upon  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  Christianity  and  the  special 
claims  of  the  Catholic  Church,  her  achievements  on  every  field 
of  civilization  (universal  charity,  individual  and  social  morality, 
education  and  science,  etc.),  will  of  itself  furnish  an  almost  end- 
less programme  at  once  thoroughly  instructive  and  truly  delight- 
ful. There  is  no  reason  why  societies  of  intelligent  and  loyal 
Catholic  men  and  women  should  be  afraid  to  take  up  in  their 
meetings  the  study  and  discussion  of  the  Catholic  Faith,  provided 
it  is  done  under  proper  guidance.  This  does  not  mply  the  con- 
tinual presence  of  an  official  censor  in  the  person  of  an  ecclesiastic. 
The  CathoHc  Enghsh  Uterature  of  to-day,  whether  in  works  of  a 
general  character  or  in  special  treatises,  tracts,  and  articles, 
offers  many  excellent  helps  to  earnest  seekers  after  a  fuller 
knowledge  of  heavenly  truth.  Where  these  Catholic  "  Guide- 
books in  Religion"  are  conscientiously  and  properly  followed 
there  will  be  no  danger  of  going  astray  on  the  byways  of  religious 
error.  Moreover,  some  clear  and  intelligent  reading,  properly 
selected,  of  a  paragraph  or  an  article  from  a  sound  CathoHc 
book  or  magazine  will  often  aiford  more  instruction  and  pleas- 
ure than  a  dozen  "  original  essays  by  club  members." 

For  the  purpose  of  pointing  out  some  of  those  safe  guides  to 
Catholic  Reading  Circles  and  others  interested  in  the  apologetics 


8  editor's  preface. 

of  their  faith,  we  have  dropped  the  author's  references  to  French 
writers  (unless  translated  into  EngUsh)  and  have,  in  their  place, 
inserted    references    to    Cathohc    English    Hterature.     CathoUc 
periodical  literature  in  particular  has  received  more  considera- 
tion than  usual.     It  is  no  exaggeration  to  say  that  some  Catholic 
magazines  are  rich  mines  of  Catholic  information;   treasures  of 
Cathohc  truth  and  sound  philosophy,  of  Cathohc  virtue  and 
culture,  of  sacred  and  profane  history,  are  hidden  there;  nothing 
else  is  needed  than  "  to  work  the  mine."     Sets,  more  or  less 
complete,  of  such  magazines  are  found  in  Cathohc  colleges  and 
convents,  the  libraries  of  Cathohc  clubs,  and  sometimes  in  "  the 
study",  of  the  priest  and  the   educated  layman.      The  same 
may  be  said  of  Cathohc   books   in  defence  of  rehgion.    The 
following  list  of  Catholic  apologetic  literature  to  which  reference 
is  frequently  made  in  this  volume,  may  appear  overcrowded. 
Our  excuse  is  in  the   desire  of   helping  all,  the  high  and  the 
lowly,  the  city  and  the  country  reader.     What  does  not  suit 
one  may  help  another,  and  for  the  book  vainly  sought  another 
may  be  at  hand.     A  few  books  are  mentioned  which  are  no 
longer  in  the  market.     But  then  "  out  of  print "  is  not  always 
''  out  of  the  shelf  ";    look  for  it,  by  good  luck  you  may  find  it. 
Simply  as  a  matter  of  literary  curiosity  it  may  be  observed  that 
an  English  translation  in  three  stout  volumes  of  Rev.  Anthony 
Valsecchi's  (O.Pr.;  f  1791)    "The  Foundations  of  Religion  and 
the  Sources  of  Unbelief"  (a  work  famous  in  its  time  and  prob- 
ably the  first  specimen   of  a  complete  Catholic  ''Apology"  in 
the  modem  sense)  was  published  in  Dublin  at  the  beginning  of 
the  last  century.     Of  course  it  is  O.P.    The  English  translation 
of  Bishop  Frayssinous'  (f   1841)  celebrated  "  Defence  of  Chris- 
tianity" (a  work  translated  in  all  European  languages)  shares  a 
similar  fate.     American  Catholics,  we  hope,  will  not  allow  the 
beautiful  ''  Conferences  of  Pere  Lacordaire  "  to  be  forgotten. 
The  uniform  edition  pubhshed  by  O'Shea,  N.  Y.,  some  thirty 
years  ago  (some  conferences  were  also  issued  by   Protestant 
publishers)  presents  a  splendid  course  of  Catholic  Apologetics, 
grand  in  thought  as  well  as  expression,  and  worthy  to  find  a 
place  in  every  Catholic  and  public  library. 

True,  many  of  the  arguments  given  in  the  earlier  apologies 
for  the  existence  of  God  and  the  supernatural  order,  of  revelation, 
mysteries  and  miracles,  of  free-will,  conscience  and  moral  law, 
will  not  serve  effectively  to  overturn  the  arguments  of  modern 
infidels.  As  Rev.  Dr.  Fox  (in  Cath.  World,  Jan.  1903,  p.  490  ff.) 
very  neatly  observes:  ''  Truth  does  not  change;  but,  as  you  say, 
error  does.  And  it  is  not  from  the  enduring  character  of  truth, 
but  through  the  Protean  character  of  error,  that  there  arises  a 
variation  in  the  efficacy  of  certain  demonstrations  or  reasons  for 
behef.  ...  If,  however,  we  are  to  make  Cathohc  truth   pre- 


editor's  preface.  9 

vail,  we  must  present  it  under  that  aspect  through  which  it 
will  appeal  most  strongly  to  those  whom  we  seek  to  convince. 
Not  merely  the  objective  value  of  an  argument  is  to  be  con- 
sidered, but  also  the  force  with  which  it  appeals  to  a  particular 
mental  attitude.  ...  In  a  day  when  fundamentals  are  attacked 
the  student  who  takes  utility  for  his  guide  will  wisely  devote 
himself  to  those  parts  of  theology — using  the  term  broadly — 
which  bear  upon  the  living  issues."  The  ample  attention  given 
by  Father  Devivier  to  these  '' Uving  issues"  and  to  the  argu- 
ments of  modern  unbelief  is  one  of  the  special  attractions  and 
advantages  of  his  work. 

Persons  inquiring  after  some  special  point  of  CathoUc  doc- 
trine or  history  often  do  not  have  the  books  at  hand  which 
treat  in  particular  of  the  subject  concerned,  and  they  are  at  a 
loss  where  to  find  an  answer  to  their  question.  In  such  a  case 
it  will  be  best  to  look  up  some  book  of  a  general  character  corre- 
sponding with  their  subject,  where  they  may  hope  to  find  at 
least  a  plain,  if  brief,  statement  of  the  Catholic  side.  Thus,  for 
example,  for  statements  of  Doctrine  they  may  consult  the  works 
of  Bishop  Hay,  Gaume,  Card.  Gibbons,  Bagshawe,  Hunter, 
Schanz,  Hettinger,  Scheeben,  Wilmers;  Exposition  of  Catholic 
Doctrine  (3  vol.);  Spirago's  Catechism  Explained;  Mueller's 
God  our  Teacher;  Power's  Catechism.  For  statements  regard- 
ing events  or  facts  in  Church  History  see  the  works  by  Alzog, 
Briick,  Birkhauser,  Parsons,  Gilmartin;  Butler  (Lives  of  the 
Saints);  Pastor  and  Mann  on  the  Popes;  Balmes,  Young,  De 
Haulleville,  and  Brownlow  on  Catholic  Civilization;  Jansen, 
Gasquet,  Cobbett,  and  Archbp.  Spalding  on  the  Reformation. 
On  points  of  Controversy  see  the  Chfton  Tracts,  the  Paulist 
Tracts,  the  tracts  of  the  Catholic  Truth  Societies,  especially  that 
of  England;  Ryder,  Milner,  De  Trevem,  Searle,  besides  the 
general  expositions  of  the  Catholic  Creed;  Arnold's  Catholic 
Dictionary  and  Theui's  Ecclesiastical  Dictionary  may  also  be 
of  good  service. 

In  justice  to  the  translator  of  this  volume,  Miss  Ella  McMahon, 
it  must  be  stated  that  several  additions  inserted  from  the  latest 
French  edition  have  been  translated  by  the  editor.  With  the 
exception  of  some  slight  changes  in  the  arrangement  and  of  a 
few  additional  sentences  to  render  the  author's  meaning  clearer, 
the  original  text  has  been  preserved. 

May  Devivier's  Christian  Apologetics  help  to  set  more  fully 
aglow  the  CathoUc  Faith  in  many  minds,  and  to  fan  in  the  hearts 
of  the  faithful  the  fire  of  holy  love  for  Mother  Church! 

4"S.  G.  Messmer. 
Easter,  1903. 


LIST  or  EEFERENCES. 

The  asterisk  (*)  indicates  a  Protestant  writer. 

A.  C.  Q.     The  American  Catholic  Quarterly  Review. 

A.  E.  R.     American  Ecclesiastical  Review.    (A  monthly  for  the 

Clergy.) 

Aiken.  The  Dhamma  of  Gotama,  or  the  Buddha  and  the  Gospel 
of  Christ. 

Allies.  Formation  of  Christendom.  3  vol. — Church  and  State. — 
The  Throne  of  the  Fisherman. — Peter's  Rock  in  Moham- 
med's Flood. — ^The  Holy  vSee  and  the  Wandering  of  the 
Nations. — The  Monastic  Life. — The  See  of  Peter. — St. 
Peter,  his  Name  and  Ofhce. 

Alnatt.  Cathedra  Petri. — The  Church  and  the  Sects. — Church 
and  Bible. — Bible  and  the  Reformation. 

Anderdon.     Luther. 

Audin.  Lives  of  Luther,  Calvin,  Henry  VIII.  3  vol.  (Not 
always  reliable.) 

Azarias.     Essay  on  the  Philosophy  of  Literature. 

Bagshawe.     Credentials  of  the  Catholic  Church. 

Balmes.  European  Civilization,  or  Catholicity  and  Protestant- 
ism Compared. — Letters  to  a  Sceptic. 

Baluffi.     The  Charity  of  the  Church  Proof  of  her  Divinity. 

Barry,  Wm.  The  Papal  Monarchy  from  Gregory  the  Great  to 
Boniface  VIII. 

Barton.     Angels  of  the  Battlefield. 

Bayaert.     The  Workman. 

*  Beal.     Bioplasm. — Life  Theories. 
Beane.     Cardinal  Lavigerie. 

Begin.     The  Bible  and  the  Rule  of  Faith. 
Belloc.     Historic  Nuns. 
Best      The  Victories  of  Rome. 
Bellord.     Relics  of  the  True  Cross. 

B.  N.     History  of  the  Jesuits. 

*  Bissell.    The  Pentateuch,  its  Origin  and  Structure. 
Boedder,  S.J.     Natural  Theology. 

Bossuet.     The  Variations  of  Protestantism.     2  vol. 

Botalla,  S.J.     Papacy  and  Schism. — Authority  of  the  Pope. — 

Infalhbility  of  the  Pope.     (These  two  vols,  also  under  the 

title:  The  Church  and  the  Pope.) 

11 


12  LIST  OF  REFERENCES. 

Bougaud.     The  Divinity  of  Christ. 

Bowden.    The  Witness  of  the  Saints. 

Brann.     The  Great  Schism  of  the  West. — ^Truth  and  Error. — 

The  Popes  the  Protectors  of  Popular  Liberty. 
Bree.     Fallacies  of  Darwinism. 

Breen,  A.  E.    Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures. 
Breen,  J.  D.     Sacerdotalism. — ^Anglican  Orders. 
Brennan.     Science  and  the  Bible. — What  Catholics  have  done 

for  Science. 
Bridgett.     Ritual  of  the  New  Testament, 
Broeckardt,S.J.     The  Fact  Divine.     (A  short  Christian  Apology.) 

*  Brown.     Assyriology,  its  Use  and  Abuse. 
Brownlow.     Slavery  and  Serfdom  in  Europe. 
Bronmson,  H.     Faith  and  Science. 

Br.    W.    Works    of    Orestes    Brownson. — Liberalism  and  the 

Church. — Brownson's  Views  (by  H.  B.). 
"^ Buckingham.  The  Bible  in  the  Middle  Ages. 
Burnet.     Path  which  Led  a  Protestant  Lawyer  to  the  Catholic 

Church. — Reasons  why  we  should  believe  in  God,  etc. 
Butler.     Lives  of  the  Saints.     12  vol. 
Capel.     Catholic. 

Casey,  S.J.    The  Bible  and  its  Interpreter. 
Catholic  Church  (the)  from  Within. 
C.  S.S.  L.     Catholic  Summer  School  Library.     6  vol. 
C.  T.  S.     CathoHc  Truth  Society  of  England.     (Its  publications 

contain  a  large  amount  of  apologetic  literature.) 
C.  W.     The  CathoHc  World.     (Monthly  magazine.) 
Chatard.     Christian  Truths. — Occasional  Essays. 
Chateaubriand.     Genius  of  Christianity. 
Clarke,    S.J.     Theosophy. — Divinity    of    Christ. — Existence    of 

God. — The  Pope  and  the  Bible. — Lourdes. — Card.  Lavigerie 

and  the  Slave-trade. 
Cobb,  S.  H.     The  Rise  of  Religious  Liberty  in  America. 
Cobbett.     History  of  the  Prot.  Reformation  in  England.    (Ed.  by 

Dom  Gasquet.) 

*  Cook.     Religion  and  Chemistry. — Credentials  of  Science  and 

Warfare  of  Faith. 
Coppens,    S.J.     The    Living    Church. — Moral    Principles    and 

Medical  Practice. — Moral  Philosophy. 
Corvo,  Fred.     Chronicles  of  the  House  of  Borgia. 
Cox,  Th.     The  Pillar  and  the  Ground  of  Truth. 

*  Craig.     Christian  Persecutions. 

*  Creighton.     History  of  the  Papacy  during  the  Reformation. 
Dangers  (the)  of  Spiritualism. 

*  Deadly  Error  (the)  of  Christian  Science.     (Philadelphia.) 
De  Concilia.     Harmony  between  Science  and  Religion. 

De  Trevem.     An  Amicable  Discussion. 


LIST  OF  REFERENCES.  13 

Devas.    Studies  in  Family  Life.— Political  Economy. 

Didon,  O.Pr.     Jesus  Christ.     2  vol. — Belief  in  the  Divinity  of 

Jesus  Christ  — Science  without  God. 
Dighy,     Mores  CathoHci,  or  the  Ages  of  Faith.     4  vol. 

*  Diman.    The  Theistic  Argument. 

Doellinger,  Luther:  a  biographic  sketch. — Heathenism  and 
Judaism. — Judaism  and  Christianity. — ^The  First  Ages  of 
Christianity. — Fables  concerning  the  Popes. — Church  and 
Churches.     (Most  of  these  books  are  O.P.) 

Dot.     The  Dolphin.     (A  monthly.) 

D.  R.     The  DubUn  Review. 

Drane.     Christian  Schools  and  Scholars. 

Driscoll.  God  — The  Human  Soul.  (Both  under  the  title : 
Christian  Philosophy.) 

Dupanloup.     Papal  Sovereignty. 

Dwenger.     The  Spanish  Inquisition. 

Earnshaw.    The  Catholic  Church  and  Civil  Governments. 

*  Einstein,  Lewis.     The  Italian  Renaissance  in  England. 
England,  Bishop.     His  Works.     5  vol. 

*  Evans.     Christian  Doctrine  of  Marriage. 

Faber.     Essay  on  Beatification  and  Canonization.     (Vol.  I.  of 

Oratorian  Lives  of  the  Saints.) 
Faith  (the)  of  Catholics.     3  vol.     (Testimonies  of  the  Primitive 

Church.) 
Fastre.     Acts  of  the  Early  Martyrs.     5  vol. 
Feasey.     Monasticism:   What  is  it? 

*  Fiske,  John.     New  France  and  New  England. 
Fitz-Arthur.     The  Worth  of  Human  Testimony. 

Fouard.  Jesus  Christ. — St.  Peter  and  the  First  Years  of  Chris- 
tianity.— St.  Paul  and  his  Missionary  Labors. 

Fox.     Religion  and  Morality. 

Frayssinous.     Defence  of  Christianity. 

Freppel.     Discourse  on  the  Divinity  of  Christ. 

Gagarin.     The  Russian  Clergy. 

Galway,  S.J.  Thoughts  on  ApostoHc  Succession. — Is  Ritualism 
Honest?    2  vol. 

Ganss.     Mariolatry. 

Garratt     Loretto,  the  New  Nazareth. 

Garside.    The  Sacrifice  of  the  Eucharist  and  other  Doctrines. 

Gasquet.  Eve  of  the  English  Reformation.— The  Old  Enghsh 
Bible. — Henry  VIII.  and  the  English  Monasteries. 

Gaume.  Catechism  of  Perseverance.  4  vol.  (A  mine  of  doc- 
trinal and  apologetic  information. ) 

*  Gaynor.     The  New  Materialism. 

Gerard,  S.J.    The  Gunpowder  Plot.— Science  and  Scientists.— 

Science  or  Romance. — ^The  Antidote. 
Gibbons.     Faith  of  our  Fathers.— Our  Christian  Heritage. 


14  LIST   OF  REFERENCES. 

Gigot.    Biblical  Lectures. — ^A  General  Introduction  to  the  Study 

of  the  Holy  Scriptures. 
Gleason.     Trials  of  the  Church. 
Gmeiner.     Scientific  Views  and  Christian  Doctrines. — Spirits  of 

D  arkness .  — Emmanuel . 
Gordon.     Seven  Lectures,  or  Some  Doctrines  of  the  Church. 

*  Graham,  R.  B.  C.    A  Lost  Arcadia,  or  the  Jesuits  in  Paraguay. 
Green.     Indulgences  and  Tax  Tables. 

Guibert.     In  the  Beginning 

*  Gurnhill.     The  Morals  of  Suicide. 
Hammer  stein,  S.J.     Foundations  of  the  Faith. 

Haulleville,  de.     The  Future  of  Catholic  Peoples  (against  Lave- 

laye's  Protestantism  and  Catholicism.) 
Hawarden.     Truth  and  Charity. 

Hay,  Bishop.     His  Works.     5  vol. — On  Miracles.     2  vol. 
Hedley.    Who  is  Jesus  Christ? — ^The  Spirit  of  Faith. — Christian 

Inheritance. 
Hecker.     Aspirations  of  Nature. 
Henry,  L.  E. — ^The  Cloister,  or  the  Apostolic  Monks  and  Nuns 

who  Live  there. 
Hergenroether.    The  Catholic  Church  and  the  Christian  State. 

2  vol. — Anti- Janus. 
Hettinger.     Natural  Religion. — ^Revealed  Religion. — Supremacy 

of  the  Apostolic  See. 
Hewit.     The  King's  Highway. — Problems  of  the  Age. 
Hope.     Conversion  of  the  Teutonic  Race. — ^The  First  Divorce 

of  Henry  VIII. 
Hughes,  Archbp.    Works.     2  vol. — Debate  with   Breckenridge. 

— Brooksiana. 
Hughes,  S.J.     Principles  of  Anthropology  and  Biology. 
Humphrey,  S.J.     The  Sacred  Scriptures.     (Formerly  under  the 

title:  The   Written   Word.)— The   Bible   and   Behef.— The 

Vicar  of  Christ. — Urbs  et  Orbis. — Christian  Marriage. 
Hunter.     Outlines  of  Dogmatic  Theology.     3  vol. 
/.  E.  R.     Irish  Ecclesiastical  Record.    (A  monthly  for  the  clergy.) 
Ives.     Two  Lectures  on  the  Inquisition. 
Jansen.     History  of  the  German  people.     6  vol. 
Johnson,  L.     Religious  Liberty  in  Maryland  and  Rhode  Island. 
Joly.     Psychology  of  the  Saints. 
Jouin,  S.J.     Evidences  of  Christianity. 
Kenrick,  P.    The  Primacy  of  the  Apostolic  See  vindicated. — 

Vindication  of  Catholics. 
Knox.    When  does  the  Church  Speak  Infallibly? 
Lacordaire     Conferences.     6  vol. — ^The  Order  of  St.  Dominic. 
Laforet.     Why  Men  do  Not  Believe. 
Lambert.    Answers  to  Ingersoll. — ^Tactics  of  Infidels. 


LIST   OE    REFEEEN"CES.  15 

Lenormant.     The  Beginnings  of  History. 

Leo.  XIII. — The  Great  EncycHcals  of  Leo  XIII.  Translations 
collected  from  Approved  Sources. 

Lilly,  W.  S.  Ancient  Religion  and  Modern  Thought. — Chapters 
in  European  History. — A  Century  of  Revolution. — Shib- 
boleths.—Claims  of  Christianity. — Essays  and  Speeches. 

Lindsay,  Collins.  De  Ecclesia  et  Cathedra,  or  The  Empire 
Church  of  Christ. — Evidences  for  the  Papacy. 

Livius.     St.  Peter,  Bishop  of  Rome. 

Lucas,  Dr.  G.  J.     Agnosticism  and  Religion. 

Lucas,  S.J.     Era  Girolamo  Savonarola. 

Lyons.     Christianity  and  Infallibility :  Both  or  Neither. 

Madden.     The  Reaction  from  Agnostic  Science. 

Maglione.     The  Vatican  and  the  Kingdom  of  Italy. 

Maker,  S.J.     Psychology. 

Maguire.  Pontificate  of  Pius  IX.  (Formerly  "  Rome,  its  Ruler 
and  Institutions.") 

Maistre,  de.  Of  the  Pope. — Letters  of  a  Gentleman  on  the 
Inquisition. 

*  Maitland.    The  Dark  Ages. 

Malachy.     Has  the  Reformation  Reformed  Anything? 

*  Mallock.     Doctrine  and  Doctrinal  Disruption. 
Manahan.     Triumph  of  Religion. 

Mann.     Lives  of  the  Popes  in  the  Early  Middle  Ages.     2  vol. 

Manning,  Card.  Miscellanies.  2  vol. — ^The  Vatican  Decrees. — 
Story  of  the  Vatican  Council. — Independence  of  the  Holy 
See. — ^Why  I  became  a  CathoHc  (formerly  under  the  title: 
Religio  Viatoris). — Characteristics  from  M.'s  writings  (by 
Lilly). — Essays  on  Religion  and  Literature.  3  vol.  (By 
different  writers,  edited  by  Mgr.  M.) 

Marcy.     Christianity  and  its  Conflicts. 

Martinet.  Religion  in  Society.  2  vol. — Philosophy  of  the 
Catechism.     (Excellent,  but  O.P.) 

Maurel,  S.J.     The  Church  and  the  Sovereign  Pontiff. 

McErlane.     The  Church  of  Christ  the  Same  Forever. 

McLaughlin.     Indifferentism. — The  Divine  Plan  of  the  Church. 

Melia.     Origin,  Persecution,  etc.,  of  the  Waldenses. 

Mercier.     Relation  of  Experimental  Psychology  to  Philosophy. 

Merry  del  Val.     The  Truth  of  Papal  Claims. 

M.  S.  H.  Messenger  of  the  Sacred  Heart.  (Monthly  magazine, 
now:  The  Messenger.) 

Michaud.     History  of  the  Crusades.     3  vol. 

Miley.     History  of  the  Papal  States.     3  vol. 

Milner,  Bishop.   The  End  of  Controversy.    (Ed.  by  L.  Rivington.) 

Ming,  S.J.    The  Holy  See.— Data  of  Modern  Ethics. 


16  LIST   OF   REFERENCES. 

Mivart.     Genesis  of  Species. — Evolution  — Lessons  from  Nature. 

— Man  and  Ape. — Origin  of  Human  Reason. — Nature  and 

Thought. 
Molitor.     Burning  Questions  (on  Church  and  State). 
Molloy.     Geology  and  Revelation. 
Monsabre.    Marriage,  Conferences  on. 
Montagu.     Some  Popular  Errors  in  Politics,  etc. 
Montalembert.    The  Monks  of  the  West.     6  vol. 
Montault,  de.     Lives  of  the  Roman  Pontiffs.     2  vol. 
M.     The  Month.     (Monthly  magazine.) 
Moran,  Card.     Occasional  Papers. 
Moriarty.     Stumbhng    Blocks    made    Stepping    Stones. — ^The 

Keys  of  the  Kingdom. — The  Catholic  Church  in  its  Relation 

to  Human  Progress. 
Mulhane,  C.  W.     Leprosy  and  the  Charity  of  the  Church. 
Mullen.    The  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament. 
Murphy,  J  N. — ^The  Chair  of  Peter. 
Newman,   Card.      Difficulties     felt     by    Anghcans. — Historical 

Sketches,  3  vols.     Development  of  Christian  Doctrine. — 

The  Idea  of  a  University. 
Nicolas.     Divinity  of  Christ. 

Northcote.    Roma  Sotteranea,  or  The  Roman  Catacombs. 
Northgraves.     Mistakes  of  Modern  Infidels. 
O'Brien,  Archhp.     The  Philosophy  of  the  Bible. 

*  Occultism,  The  Danger  of  Spiritual.     (Philadelphia.) 
O'Connor,  S.J.    Luther's  Own  Statements. 

*  O'Neil,  Warren.     Refutation  of  Darwinism. 
O'Neil,  0.  Pr.     Savonarola. 

O'Reilly^  S.J.    Relations  between  Church  and  Society. 

Ozanam.     Civilization  in  the  Fifth  Century. 

Fallen.     What  is  Liberalism? 

Palmer.     A  Visit  to  the  Russian  Church. 

Parsons.     Lies    and    Errors    of    History. — Studies   in   Church 

History.     6  vol. 
Pascal.     Or  the  Divinity  of  Christ.     (Edited  by  Rev.  Morris.) 
Pastor.     History  of  the  Popes  of  the  Renaissance.     6  vol. 
Picard.     Christianity  and  Agnosticism. 
Points  of  History.     (Boston.) 
Poland,  S.J.     The  Kingdom  of  Italy  and  the  Sovereignty  of 

Rome.— The  Truth  of  Thought. 
Pollen,  John  H.,  S.J.     Acts  of  the  Enghsh  Martyrs. 
Preston.     The    Vicar    of    Christ. — Christian    Unity — God    and 

Reason. — Reason  and  Revelation. — Protestantism  and  the 

Bible. — Protestantism  and  the  Church. 
Quatrefages.     The  Human  Species. 

*  Rashdall.     The  Universities  in  the  Middle  Ages.     2  vol. 
Reusch.     Nature  and  the  Bible.     2  vol. 

Rhodes.     Visible  Unity  of  the  Church. 


LIST   OF   REFERENCES.  17 

Ricards.     Catholic  Christianity  and  Modern  UnbeUef. — ^Aletheia. 

(On  the  CathoUc  Rule  of  Faith.) 
Rickaby,  John,  S.J.     First  Principles  of  Knowledge. 
Rickahy,  Jos.,  S.J.     Moral  Philosophy. — Oxford  and  Cambridge 

Conferences. — Positivism. — Political  and  Moral  Essays. 
Rio.     Poetry  of  Christian  Art. 
Rivington.     Authority. — Dependence. — ^The     Roman    Primacy 

from  A.D.  430  to  451. — ^The  Primitive  Church. 
*  Rogers,  Dr.  W.  R.     History  of  Babylonia  and  Assyria.     2  vol. 
Ronayne,  S.  J.    God  Knowable   and   Known. — Religion    and 

Science. 
Ryan,  Bishop.     Apostolical  Succession. 
Ryder.     Catholic  Controversy. 

Schadler.     Beauties  of  the  Catholic  Church.     (Her  Liturgy.) 
Schanz.     A  Christian  Apology.     3  vol. 
Scheehen.     Manual  of  Catholic  Theology.     2  vol. — Holiness  of 

the  Church  in  the  Nineteenth  Century. 
Schroeder.     American  Catholics  and  the  Roman  Question. 
Searle.     Plain  Facts  for  Fair  Minds. 
Shanahan.     The  Idea  of  God. 
Shea.     History   of  the   Catholic  Church  in  the  United  States. 

4  vol. — History  of  the  Catholic  Missions. 
Sheahan.     Batta,  or  Vain  Repetitions.      (Defence  of   Catholic 

Prayers.) 
Shield.    The  Bible  against  Protestantism. 
Smyth.     Genesis  and  Science. 

"^  Smith.     Acadia:  a  Lost  Chapter  in  American  History. 
Soderini.     Socialism  and  Catholicism. 
Souhen.     Beauty  of  the  Christian  Dogma. 
Spalding,    J.    L.,    Bishop.     Lectures    and   Discourses. — Essays 

and  Reviews. — Religion,  Agnosticism,  and  Education. 
Spalding,  J.  M. ,  Archhp.   Miscellanies. — Evidences  of  CathoUcity. 

— History  of  the  Protestant  Reformation. 

*  St.  Clair.     Darwinism  and  Design. 

Slang.     Luther. — On  the  Eve  of  the  Reformation.-- ^ore  about 

the  Huguenots. 
Starr ^  E.  A.     Christian  Art. 
Stone,  Kent.     The  Invitation  Heeded. 
Stevenson,  S.J.     The  Truth  about  Wycliff. 
Sweeney.     Pope  and  Emperor. — Lectures  on  the  Council. 

*  Taylor.     The  Classical  Heritage  of  the  Middle  Ages. 
Thebaud,  S.J.     Gentilism. — ^The  Church  and  the  Gentile  World. 

2  vol. — The  Church  and  the  Moral  World. 
Thompson. — Sufferings  of  the  Church  in  England. 
Thein.     Christian   Anthropology. — Difficulties   of  the  Bible, — 

The  Bible  and  Rationalism.     4  vol. 
Thorold.    CathoHc  Mysticism, 


18  LIST   OF   REFERENCES. 

Tondini.    The  Pope  of  Rome  and  the  Popes  of  the  Oriental 
Orthodox  Church. 

*  Tout.     The  Empire  and  the  Papacy,  a.d.  918-1273. 

*  Townsend.     Great  Schoolmen  of  the  Middle  Ages. 

Treacy.     Tributes  of  Protestant  Writers  to  the  Truth  and  Beauty 

of  the  Catholic  Church. 
Tyrrell,  SJ.     External  Rehgion.— The  Faith  of  the  Millions. 

2  vol. 
U.B.    University  Bulletin.     (Quarterly  review  of  the  CathoUc 

University.) 
Ullathorne.     The  Endowments  of  Man. 
Van  der  Doncht.     Mrs.  Eddy  and  Bob  Ingersoll. 
Van  der  Hagen.     Where  is  the  Church  of  Christ? 
Vaughan,  Archbp.  of  Sidney.     Science   and  Religion. — ^Reason- 
ableness of  Christianity. 
Vaughan,  J.,  Mgr.     National  Decay  and  Romanism. — Life  after 

Death  (Immortality). 
Verres. — Luther:   a  Historical  Portrait. 
Veuillot.     Life  of  Christ.     (Against  Renan.) 
Villemain. — Life  of  Gregory  VII. 
Walworth.     The  Gentle  Skeptic.     (On  the  Bible.) 
Waterworth.     The  Fathers  on  St.  Peter. 
Ward,  W.  Geo.     Philosophy  of  Theism.     2  vol. — Essays  on  the 

Church's  Doctrinal  Authority. — Devotional  and  Scriptural 

Essays. 
Ward,    Wilfrid.      The  Wish   to  Believe. — Clothes  of  Religion. 

(Both  together  with  other  essays   in  ^'Witnesses  to  the 

IJnseen.") 
Wegg-Prosser.     Galileo  and  his  Judges. 

Wilher force,  O.Pr.     Dominican  Missions  and  Martyrs  in  Japan. 
Wilberforce,  Rob.  I.     Church  Authority. 
Willington.     Dark  Pages  of  EngHsh  History.     (Prot.  Intol.) 
Wiseman,  Card.     His  Works.     9  vol. 

*  Woolsey.     Divorce   and   Divorce   Legislation   in   the   United 

States. 
Young.     Catholic  and  Protestant  Countries  Compared. 
Zohm.     Catholic   Science   and   Scientists. — Bible,  Science,  and 

Faith. 


CONTENTS. 


PAGE 

Editor's  Preface 3 

List  of  References 11 


PART    FIRST. 

THE  CHRISTIAN  RELIGION. 

Chap.     I.   General  Explanations 25 

Art.  I.  General  Notions 25 

I.   Religion 25 

II.  Revelation 29 

III.  Object  and  Division  of  this  Course 33 

IV.  The  Three  Historical  Phases  of  Revealed  Religion 34 

First  Phase :  Primitive  or  Patriarchal  Religion.  ...  34 

Second  Phase :  Mosaic  Religion 35 

Third  Phase :  The  Christian  Religion 36 

Art.  11.    Examination  of  Three  Preliminary  Questions 38 

I.    The  Role  of  Reason  in  Matters  of  Faith 38 

11.  The  Mysteries  of  Religion 42 

III.  The  Criterion  of  Certainty  in  Matters  of  Faith 46 

Chap.    II.  Historic  Value  of  the  Bible 52 

Art.  I.  Authority  of  the  Pentateuch 56 

I.  Authenticity  of  the  Pentateuch 57 

Thesis :    The  Pentateuch  is  the  Work  of  Moses, 

the  Lawgiver  of  the  Hebrews 57 

II.  Integrity  of  the  Pentateuch 60 

III.  Veracity  of  the  Pentateuch 61 

Art.  II.  The  Pentateuch  and  the  Sciences 63 

I.  The  Bible  and  Geology 72 

Thesis :  Geology  Does  Not  Contradict  the  Biblical 
Account  of  the  Origin  and  Formation  of  the 

Universe  of  the  Earth 72 

II.  The  Bible  and  Astronomy 86 

HI.  The  Bible  and  Biology 93 

IV.  The  Bible  and  Paleontology 97 

1.  Order  of  Creation  of  Organisms 97 

2.  The  Origin  of  Man.     Transformism 99 

19 


20  CONTENTS. 


PAGE 

3.  The  Difference  between  Man  and  Animals. . .   102 
Thesis:    Man  Differs  Essentially  from  Animals..  104 

4.  The  Unity  of  the  Human  Species  and  its 
Descent  from  Adam 110 

5.  Antiquity  of  the  Human  Race 117 

V.  The  Bible  and  Modern  Discoveries  in  Egypt   and 

Assyria 130 

Art.  III.  Authority  of  the  Gospels 141 

I.  Authenticity 141 

Thesis:  The  Gospels  were  Written,  in  the  First 
Century  of  the  Christian  Era,  by  the  Authors 
whose    Names    they  Bear;    that   is,    by   the 

Apostles  or  their  Immediate  Disciples 142 

II.  Integrity  of  the  Gospels 146 

III.  Truthfulness  of  the  Gospels 148 

IV.  Answers  to  Objections 152 

Chap.  III.   Demonstration  of  the  Divinity  op  the  Christian 

Religion 161 

Art.  I.  Remarks  on  the  Method  to  Follow  in  this  Demon- 
stration     161 

Art.  II.  Miracle  and  Prophecy 163 

I.  Miracle 163 

Thesis:  Miracles  are  Possible 166 

Thesis:  There  are  Miracles  of  the  Existence  of 
which  we  may  (I)  have  Certain  Knowledge, 
(II)  the  Miraculous  Nature  of  which  we  may 

Discern  Scientifically  or  Philosophically 172 

II.  Prophecy 182 

Art.  III.  Ten  Proofs  of  the  Divinity  of  the  Mission  of  Jesus 

Christ,  and  of  His  Work,  the  Christian  Religion..  183 
I.  First  Proof. 
The  Miracles  Performed  by  Our  Lord 183 

II.  Second  Proof. 

The  Resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ 187 

III.  Third  Proof. 

The  Fulfilment  of  the  Prophecies  Concerning  the 
Person  and  Mission  of  Jesus  Christ 200 

IV.  Fourth  Proof. 

The  Miracles  of  the  Apostles  and  of  the  Disciples 
of  Jesus 208 

V.  Fifth  Proof. 

Fulfilment  of  the  Prophecies  Made  by  Jesus 
Himself 212 

VI.  Sixth  Proof. 

The  Miraculous  Establishment  of  the  Religion 
of  Jesus,  and  its  Perpetual  Duration  Through 
all  Ages 217 

VII.  Seventh  Proof. 

The  Testimonv  of  the  Martyrs 229 

VIII.  Eighth  Proof. 

The  Marvellous   Fruits   of   Christianity,  or  the 


CONTENTS. 


21 


PAGE 

Wonderful  Revolution  which  it  Effected  in  the 
World 236 

IX.  Ninth  Proof. 

The  Doctrinal  Teaching  of  Christ 243 

The  Dogmatic  Teaching  of  Christ 244 

The  Moral  Teaching  of  Christ 252 

The  Teaching  of  Christ  Concerning  Worship .  .  .  255 

X.  Tenth  Proof. 

The  Incomparable  Holiness  of  Christ 278 

Chap.  IV.    The  Divinity  of  Jesus  Christ 285 

Summarv  of  the  Ten  Proofs.     Conclusion  of  the 
First  Part 292 


PART   SECOND. 

THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH. 

Chap.    I.     General  Notions 299 

I.  Our  Object 299 

II.  The  Church 301 

Thesis  :    Jesus    Christ    Truly    and    Personally- 
Founded  His  Religion  under  the  Form   of   a 

Real  Society,  of  a  Church 303 

Chap.  II.     The  Church  op  Rome  is  the  True  Church  of 

Jesus  Christ 310 

Art.     I.  Notes  of  the  True  Church  of  Jesus  Christ 311 

I.  Of  the  Notes  in  General 311 

II.  Division  of  the  Notes 313 

III.  Positive  Notes 313 

A.  Unity 313 

I.  Unity  of  Doctrine  and  Belief 314 

Thesis:    Jesus  Christ  Willed   that   His    Church 

should  be  One  in  Doctrine  and  Belief;  that  is, 
He  made  it  an  Obligation  for  Pastors  to  Teach, 
and  consequently  for  the  Faithful  to  Believe, 
Unreservedly,  all  the  Truths  Revealed  by  Him  314 

II.  Unity  of  Ministry  or  Government 317 

Thesis:    Jesus    Christ    has    Established    in    the 

Church  an  Authority  which  He  confided  to  the 
Apostles  and  to  which  all  the  Faithful  must 
Submit ;  consequently  Whosoever  Separates 
Himself  from  their  Ministry  is  Guilty  of 
Schism  and  thereby  Excluded  from  the  Church  318 

B.  Sanctity 321 

I.  The  Sanctity  of  the  Church  in  General 321 

Thesis:   The  Church  of  Christ  is  not  Composed 

Exclusively  of  Men  Just  in  the  Sight  of  God  . .  323 

II.  The  Sanctity  of  the   Church  Considered  as 

a  Note 323 


22  CONTENTS. 

PAGE! 

C.  Catholicity 324 

Thesis:  Catholicity  is  an  Indispensable  Attribute 
of  the  True  Church 325 

D.  Apostolicity 327 

Thesis:     Jesus   Christ   willed  that    the  Powers 

Given  to  His  Apostles  should  be  Transmitted 

to  all  their  Successors 327 

Art.  II.  The  Church  of  Rome  Possesses  the  Four  Positive 

Notes  of  the  True  Church 331 

I.  The  Church  of  Rome  Possesses  Unity 331 

II.  The  Church  of  Rome  Possesses  Sanctity 335 

III.  The  Church  of  Rome  Possesses  Catholicity 338 

IV.  The  Church  of  Rome  Possesses  Apostolicity 339 

Conclusion  of  Article  II 342 

Art.  III.  Protestantism  Does  Not  Possess  the  Notes  of  the 

True  Church  of  Christ 343 

I.  Protestantism  is  Absolutely  Devoid  of  Unity 345 

II.  Protestantism  Does  Not  Possess  Holiness 348 

III.  Protestantism  Does  Not  Possess  Catholici  y 352 

IV.  Protestantism  Does  Not  Possess  Apostoliciiy 352 

V.  The  Protestant  Rule  of  Faith  Differs  from  that  of 

Christ 355 

Thesis:  The  Protestant  Rule  of  Faith  is  Untenable..  355 
Art.  IV.  The  Schismatic  Greek  Church  Does  No    Possess 

the  Marks  of  the  True  Church 360 

I.  The  Greek   Church  has   Neither  Un  y  of  Belief 

nor  of  Ministry . 366 

.  II.  The  Greek  Church  Does  Not  Possess  Sanc'ity 368 

III.  The  Greek  Church  Does  Not  Possess  Catholicity. . .  369 

IV.  The  Greek  Church  Does  Not  Possess  Apo  tolicity . .  370 
Conclusion 371 

Art.  V.  The  Primacy  of  th:  See  of  Peter,  or  the  Papacy. . .   373 
First  Thesis:  Christ  Conferred  upon  St.  Peter  the 

Primacy  of  Jurisdiction  over  the  Whole  Church. .   373 
Second   Thesis :    Jesus  Christ    Desired    that    this 
Primacy  should  Descend  to  the  Lawful  Successors 

of  Peter 381 

Third  Thesis:   The  Church  o:'  Rome  Possesses  the 

Primacy  of  the  See  of  Peter 383 

Chap.  III.  Certain  Prerogatives  Conferred  by  Jesus  Christ 

UPON  His  Church 391 

Art.    I.  Indefectibility  of  the  Church 391 

Thesis :  Jesus  Christ  Wished  His  Church  to  Endure 
without  any  Essential  Change  until  the  End  of 

Time 392 

Art.  II.  Authority  or  Powers  of  the  Church 393 

I.  The  Power  to  Teach 394 

II.  The  Power  to  Confer  the  Sacraments 397 

III.  Power  to  Govern 397 

Art.  III.  Infallibility  of  the  Church 399 

I.  Its  Nature  and  Necessity 399 


CONTENTS.  23 

PAGE 

First  Thesis:  The  Authority  Divinely  Estaoushed 
to  Teach  Men  the  Doctrine  of  Jesus  Christ  must 
be  Infallible  in  its  Teaching 400 

Second  Thesis  :  Jesus  Christ  Established  in  His 
Church  an  Authority  Infallible  in  its  Dogmatic 

and  Moral  Teaching 401 

II.  Object  of  Infallibility 403 

III.  Subject  of  Infallibility 404 

Thesis:    When  He  speaks  as  Head  of  the  Church, 

with  Plenary  Doctrinal  Authority,  the  Sovereign 
Pontiff  is  Invested  with  Infallibility 405 

IV.  Conditions  of  Infallibility 409 

Art.  IV.  Relations  between  Church  and  State 410 

First  Thesis:  The  Ecclesiastical  Power  and  the 
Civil  Power,  Church  and  State,  are  Independent 
or  Sovereign,   each  Within  the    Limits    of    its 

Proper  Sphere  of  Action 411 

I.  Independence  of  the  Spiritual  Power 411 

II.  Independence  of  the  Civil  Power 415 

III.  Rights  of  the  Church     416 

Second  Thesis:   In  Cases  of  Conflict,  that  is,  when 

in  Mixed  Matters  the  Two  Authorities  Prescribe 
Contradictory  Obligations  for  Members  Owing 
Allegiance  to  Both  Powers,  the  Authority  of  the 
Church  must  Prevail  over  that  of  Civil  Society.  .  417 
Third  Thesis:  The  Church  and  the  State  should 
Mutually  Help  Each  Other 419 

IV.  The  Church  should  Aid  and  Protect  the  State 420 

V.  The    Temporal    Power    Owes  Assistance    to    the 

Church 420 

Art.    V.  On  Liberalism  and  Liberty 424 

I.  Notions  Concerning  Liberalism 424 

II.  Modern  Liberties 435 

III.  Tolerance 442 

IV.  Notions  Concerning  Liberty 449 

Chap.  IV.  Certain  Accusations  against  the  Church 457 

Art.     I.  Intolerance  of  the  Church 458 

I.  In  What  Sense  the  Catholic  Church  is  Intolerant.  .  458 
II.  Protestant  Intolerance 460 

III.  Intolerance  of  Other  Enemies  of  the  Church 464 

IV.  On  the  Maxim:    Outside  the  Church  There  is  No 

Salvation 466 

Art.  II.  The  Inquisition :    473 

I.  Lawfulness  of  the  Inquisition  in  Principle 476 

II.  The  Proceedings  of  the  Inquisition 480 

Art.  III.  The  Trial  of  Galileo 488 

I.  The   Decree  of   1616  and  the   InfallibHity  of  the 

Church 489 

II.  Was  Galileo  a  Martyr  to  Science? 493 

Art.  IV.  The  Massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew  and  the  Revo- 
cation of  the  Edict  of  Nantes 496 


24  CONTENTS. 

PAGE 

Art.    V.  Crusades  and  So-called  Religious  Wars 503 

Art.  VI.  The  Papal   Power  over  Temporal   Rulers  in   the 

Middle  Ages 507 

I.  The  Power  Exercised  by  the  Popes  in  the  Middle 
Ages    over    Temporal    Princes     was     Perfectly 

Lawful 508 

II.  The  Popes  Exercised  their  Rights  in  a  Manner  Very 

Salutary  to  Society 512 

Art.  VII.  The  Temporal  Sovereignty  of  the  Popes 514 

Art.  VIII.  Bad  Popes 517 

Chap.  V.    The  Church  and  Civilization 521 

Art.    I.    The  State  of  the  World  before  Christ,  or  Pagan 

Civilization 523 

I.  A  General  Glance 523 

II.  The  Lot  of  Individuals 526 

I.  Slaves 526 

11.  Gladiators 528 

III.  The  Poor  and  the  Unfortunate 530 

IV.  Workmen 531 

III.  The  Family 531 

IV.  Public  Society  and  the  Relations  between  Nations .   533 
Art.  II.  The  State  of  the  World  after  Christ,  or  Christian 

Civilization 535 

I.  A  General  Glance 535 

II.  The  Lot  of  Individuals 536 

I.  Slaves  and  Gladiators 536 

II.  The  Poor  and  the  Unfortunate 539 

III.  The  Working  Classes 540 

III.  Family  Life 541 

IV.  Public  Society  and  the  Relations  between  Nations.  542 
V.  Transformation  of  Barbarous  Nations 543 

VI.  Catholic  and  Pr  testant  Nations 546 

Art.  III.  The  Church  and  Intellectual  Culture 550 

I.  The   Influ  nee   of    the    Church    on    Letters   and 

Science o50 

II.  Th-  Church  and  the  Fine  Arts 557 

III.  The  Church  and  Education 558 

I.  Popular  Education 558 

II.  University  and  College  Education 567 

General  Conclusion 571 

Alphabetical  Index ^^^ 


CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS, 


PART  FIRST. 
THE  CHRISTIAN  RELIGION. 


CHAPTER  I. 

GENERAL  EXPLANATIONS. 

ART.  I.— GENERAL  NOTIONS. 

I.  Religion. 

Religion. — According  to  the  etymological  meaning  of  the 
word,  religion  may  be  defined  as  the  sum  of  the  ties  or  rela- 
tions which  bind  man  to  God.^  Between  God  and  man  there 
exist  two  kinds  of  relations:  one  results  immediately  and 
of  necessity  from  the  very  nature  of  man;  the  other  has 
been  added  by  the  free  and  sovereign  will  of  God.  The 
first  kind,  with  the  duties  which  flow  therefrom,  constitutes 
natural  religion;  the  second  forms  supernatural  religion. 
It  is  important  to  have  a  clear  and  accurate  idea  of  this 
distinction. 

*  On  the  Existence  of  God  see  Chatard  (Ch.  Tr.),  Garke,  Driscoll, 
Gibbons  (Ch.  H.),  Lambert,  Manning  (R.  V.,  a.  1),  Northgraves, 
Archbp.  O'Brien,  Rickaby,  Ricards,  Ronayne,  Br.  W.  ii.  (Refut.  of 
Atheism),  A.  C.  Q.  vi.,  vii.,  xi.,  and  in  general  works  against  Atheism, 
Agnosticism,  and  Positivism,  especially  Picard,  Lucas,  Madden,  T.E.R., 
Oct.,  Nov.  1901 ;  also  references  on  next  page.  On  Religion  see 
Schanz,  I.,  ch.  3,  4. 

36 


26  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

Natural  Religion.^ — Man,  created  by  God  out  of  nothing, 
holds  from  his  Creator  all  that  he  is  and  all  that  he  has: 
his  body  with  all  its  senses;  his  soul  with  all  its  faculties. 
He  is  indebted  to  God  every  moment  for  the  preservation  and 
development  of  this  body  and  this  soul,  and  the  divine 
concurrence  is  necessary  for  every  one  of  his  acts.  From 
God  come  also  all  the  creatures  with  whom  we  are  in  per- 
petual relation  by  reasons  of  necessity,  pleasure,  or  profit. 

If  this  be  our  position,  and  it  undoubtedly  is,  if  man 
holds  everything  so  absolutely  from  God  that  without  Him 
he  would  have  nothing,  would  not  even  exist  and  act,  it  is 
undeniably  evident  that  man  belongs  to  God ;  that  he  is  His 
property  and  possession;  that  he  must  live  in  absolute  de- 
pendence upon  his  Creator  and  Benefactor;  that  he  can 
think,  that  he  can  say,  that  he  can  do  only  what  God  wills; 
that  he  must  conduct  himself  everywhere  and  always  as  a 
subject  toward  his  sovereign  master.  These  relations  and 
these  duties  are  as  immutable  as  they  are  necessary,  for  the 
nature  of  man  does  not  change,  and  God  cannot  cease  to 
be  his  Creator  and  sovereign  Master. 

These  relations,  or,  if  you  will,  this  absolute  dependence  on 
God,  and  these  duties  constitute  natural  religion.  It  may  be 
defined  as  the  sum  of  the  relations  which  exist,  in  virtue  of 
the  creation  itself,  between  God  and  man,  together  with  the 
duties  which  these  relations  impose  on  man. 

We  shall  not  insist  any  further  on  these  natural  relations 
between  God  and  man.  This  belongs  to  the  province  of 
philosophic  inquiry.  No  rational  being  can  doubt  the  ex- 
istence and  obligation  of  natural  religion  without  denying 
God  and  the  creation  of  man,  and  without  destroying  the 
moral  order  upon  which  human  society  is  based.  ^ 

Supernatural    or    Positive    Religion. — Besides    these 

'  Hettinger,  N.  R.;  Boedder,  S.J.,  N.  Th.;  Preston,  G.  and  R. 

2  Fox,  Rel.  and  Mor.;  A.  C.  Q.  xxv.  41;  I.  E.  R.,  Apr.  1902; 
also  Catholic  writers  on  Ethics  or  Moral  Philosophy,  f.  i.  Rickaby, 
Conway,  Ming,  etc. 


GENERAL  EXPLANATIONS.  27 

first  ties,  God,  in  His  supreme  authority  and  infinite  goodness, 
could  have  estabhshed  between  Him  and  His  creature  higher 
relations  and  more  intimate  communication. 

Nothing,  in  truth,  obhged  God  to  do  more  for  man  than 
the  needs  of  the  nature  He  had  given  him  required,  nor 
could  anything  prevent  Him  from  lavishing  new  benefits 
upon  him.  He  was  free  to  raise  man,  who  was  only  His 
subject,  to  the  dignity  of  His  son  by  adoption;  to  communi- 
cate to  him,  by  means  of  sanctifying  grace,  a  principle  of  life 
higher  than  that  which  he  held  from  his  nature,  preparing 
for  him  at  the  end  of  his  life  the  incomparable  happiness 
of  contemplating  in  heaven  his  Creator  and  Father  face  to 
face.  Such  an  act  of  ineffable  goodness,  performed  in  virtue 
of  the  plenitude  of  His  dominion  over  man,  in  no  way 
destroys  the  first  work  of  God;  in  fact,  the  relations  and 
the  duties  which  constitute  natural  religion  continue  to  exist, 
and  these  new  relations  only  elevate,  perfect,  and  embellish 
the  nature  of  man.  Thus  the  graft  does  not  destroy  the 
nature  of  the  tree;  it  only  changes  and  improves  it. 

New  duties  for  man  necessarily  spring  from  these  new 
relations.  Let  us  beware,  however,  of  regarding  them  as  an 
onerous  burden.  These  obligations,  which  are,  moreover, 
light,  are  most  abundantly  compensated  by  the  multiplied 
advantages  which  result  from  our  elevation  to  the  super- 
natural order.  God,  at  the  same  time  that  He  assigned  us 
an  end,  a  destiny  incomparably  more  sublime  than  the  end 
we  should  have  had  in  the  purely  natural  order,  promised 
us  a  happiness  incomparably  greater,  and  He  has  given  us, 
in  supernatural  grace,  most  powerful  and  abundant  means 
of  attaining  this  end  and  of  meriting  this  happiness.  Let 
us  observe,  in  passing,  that  this  grace  gives  us  much  greater 
facility  for  observing  the  decalogue,  that  is,  for  accomplishing 
the  duties  which  flow  from  our  nature  itself. 

This  supernatural  religion  is  also  called  positive,  because  it 
is  imposed  upon  man  by  a  positive  and  formal  act  of  the  free 
will  of  God. 


28  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

Supernatural  religion  may  be  defined  as  the  sum  of  the  new 
relations  which  elevate  man  to  the  dignity  of  a  child  of  God, 
and  assign  him  as  final  end  the  beatific  vision,  the  sight  of 
God  face  to  face  in  heaven,  as  well  as  the  duties  which  result 
from  these  supereminent  relations. 

Remarks. — 1st.  By  the  last  end  of  man  we  mean  the 
supreme  term  of  his  existence,  the  end  he  is  obliged  to  attain 
and  the  possession  of  which  will  cause  him  to  obtain  his 
perfection  and  eternal  happiness. 

2d.  God  only  is  the  last  end  of  every  intelligent  creature. 
But  God  may  be  known  directly,  i.e.  in  Himself,  or  indirectly, 
i.e.  by  means  of  His  works.  If  man  had  been  created  only 
for  a  natural  end,  his  fidelity  in  accomplishing,  during  the 
time  of  his  probation,  the  precepts  of  the  natural  law  would 
have  merited  for  him,  at  the  end  of  his  probation,  a  natural 
happiness.  Then,  contemplating  in  creatures  the  traces  of 
the  divine  perfections,  he  would  have  had  a  very  perfect 
knowledge  of  God.  He  would  have  loved  Him  with  a  love 
proportionate  to  this  knowledge,  and  in  this  knowledge  and 
this  love  he  would  have  found  the  complete  satisfaction  of 
his  desires.  Very  superior,  however,  is  the  supernatural  end 
or  happiness  for  which  he  is  destined.  It  consists  in  seeing 
God  as  He  is  in  Himself,  consequently  in  loving  Him,  and 
in  possessing  Him  in  an  immediate  and  ineffable  manner. 
To  this  end  the  intelligence  must  necessarily  be  raised  above 
its  own  strength  by  an  aid  essentially  supernatural,  which 
theologians  call  the  light  of  glory.  This  aid  or  this  grace 
communicates  to  the  soul  a  sort  of  participation  of  the  divine 
nature,  as  St.  Peter  says  (2  Pet.  i.  4),  and  renders  it  capable 
of  enjoying  the  same  good  which  constitutes  the  infinite 
happiness  of  God. 

3d.  It  would  be  an  error  to  think  that  Adam  was  raised  to 
the  supernatural  order  only  after  he  had  lived  a  longer  or 
shorter  period  under  the  rule  alone  of  natural  law  or  religion: 
the  privilege  of  child  of  God  was  granted  and  imposed  upon 
Adam,  for  himself  and  his  posterity,  simultaneously  with 


GENERAL   EXPLANATIONS.  29 

that  of  existence.     Hence  man  never  had  a  purely  natural 
end. 

II.  Revelation.^ 

Nature  of  Revelation. — ^Natural  religion  being  a  neces- 
sary consequence  of  the  relations  existing  between  God  and 
man  in  virtue  of  their  very  nature,  it  follows  that  in  order 
to  prove  the  necessity  ^  and  existence  of  this  religion  it 
suffices  to  have  a  proper  knowledge  of  the  two  beings 
between  whom  these  relations  exist.  Thus  man  may, 
without  other  assistance,  discover  the  truths  and  precepts 
of  natural  religion.  He  finds  them  engraven,  so  to  speak, 
by  the  hand  of  God,  in  the  depth  of  his  mind  and  heart. 

With  supernatural  religion  it  is  very  different:  as  there  is 
question  here  of  relations  which  arise  solely  from  the  free 
will  of  God,  natural  reason  is  powerless  to  discover  them. 
The  truths  and  precepts  of  the  supernatural  order  can  be 
known  to  us  only  by  a  manifestation  on  the  part  of  God, 
by  a  revelation.  Revelation,  therefore,  is  the  means  by 
which  God  makes  supernatural  religion  known  to  man. 
For  this  reason  the  terms  supernatural  religion  and  revealed 
religion  are  usually  confounded. 

Revelation  may  be  defined  as  a  supernatural  act  by  which 
God  makes  known  certain  truths  to  man.  We  say  in  a 
general  way  certain  truths,  because  God  may,  if  He  pleases, 
reveal  not  only  supernatural  truths,  but  also  truths  which 
are  not  in  themselves  above  reason.  In  fact,  a  good  number 
of  truths  of  this  kind  have  been  revealed  to  us.  For  example, 
the  precepts  of  the  decalogue,  with  the  exception  of  those 
relating  to  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath,  belong  to  the 
natural  law;  God,  however,  has  not  deemed  it  useless  to 
strengthen  our  conscience  by  a  solemn  revelation  of  these 
precepts.     He  has  thus  added  to  the  light  of  reason  the 

^  Schanz,  II.;  Hunter,  I.;  Hettinger,  R.  R.;  Manning,  I.e. 
^On  Indifferentism  see  McLaughlin;  Bp.  Spalding,  1.  1;   C.  T.  S. 
37;  Hettinger,  N.R.,  ch.  1. 


30  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

authority  of  His  infallible  word  in  order  to  make  the  knowl- 
edge of  these  fundamental  truths  which  are  necessary  to  all 
men  easier,  more  certain,  purer,  and  more  universal. 

Possibility  of  Revelation. — In  order  to  ruin  the  very 
foundation  of  all  supernatural  religion,  the  enemies  of  Chris- 
tianity have  accumulated  a  number  of  sophisms  tending  to 
establish  the  impossibility  of  all  revelation.  We  need  not  stop 
to  refute  them  at  any  length.  We  shall  do  better.  We  shall 
prove  most  positively  that  revelation  really  exists,  and  it 
must  follow  of  itself  that  it  is  possible.  A  simple  observation 
suggested  by  common  sense  is  sufficient,  moreover,  to  over- 
throw the  whole  scaffolding  of  rationalism.  Man,  an  intelli- 
gence finite  and  limited  in  so  many  respects,  has  received 
from  God  the  power  to  communicate  his  thoughts  to  a 
fellow  being,  yet  God  could  be  powerless  to  enter  into  com- 
munication with  man!  A  scholar  may  impart  to  the  ignorant 
the  secrets  which  his  genius  has  penetrated,  yet  God  could 
lack  means  to  communicate  to  us  truths  which  concern  our 
highest  interests,  our  elevation  to  the  supernatural  order! 

Such  revelation  is  the  more  possible  in  that  it  responds 
to  the  divine  goodness  and  is  of  incontestable  advantage 
to  man:  by  enlightening  the  mind,  it  communicates  greater 
energy  to  the  will  and  thus  aids  man  to  attain  his  end.  It 
is  evident,  moreover,  that  revelation,  so  far  from  crushing 
and  annihilating  our  reason,  tends  to  perfect  it,  by  causing 
it  to  know  sublime  and  important  truths  that  it  never,  of 
itself,  could  have  discovered.  Does  the  telescope  destroy 
the  sight  because  it  gives  it  greater  range,  and  causes  it 
to  see  stars  hitherto  hidden  in  the  depth  of  the  firmament? 
Are  the  physical  powers  of  man  destroyed  because  the 
lever,  steam,  and  electricity  help  him  to  do  a  tenfold  work? 

Necessity  of  Revelation.^ — If  revelation  is  possible,  if 
it  is  of  incontestable  advantage,  and  if,  as  we  shall  show, 
it  really  exists,  we  may  dispense  with  proving  its  necessity. 

^Br.  W.  V.  280  ff.,  302  ff.;  Hecker,  Aspirations;  Humphrey, 
Written  W.,  ch.  13  ;  Archbp.  O'Brien,  p.  iii.,  ch.  5. 


GENERAL   EXPLANATIONS.  31 

Something,  however,  should  be  said  upon  this  question, 
particularly  at  a  time  when  we  hear  so  much  of  the  independ- 
ence and  sovereignty  of  reason,  and  when  so  many  absolutely 
deny  supernatural  revelation,  regarding  it  as  useless  and 
superfluous. 

Let  us  distinguish,  first  of  all,  between  moral  necessity  and 
physical  or  absolute  necessity.  The  latter  supposes  a  com- 
plete impossibility  to  attain,  without  revelation,  religious 
truth;  the  former,  great  but  not  insurmountable  difficulty. 

It  is  evident  that  a  revelation  is  absolutely  necessary  to 
make  known  to  us  the  existence  and  the  duties  of  the  super- 
natural order.  Here,  in  fact,  all  depends,  as  we  have  seen, 
on  the  free  will  of  God.  The  same  necessity  exists  for  attain- 
ing a  knowledge  of  the  mysteries  w^hich  it  pleases  God  to 
teach  us:  we  shall  make  this  sufficiently  evident  later. 

But  it  is  not  the  same  with  the  theoretical  and  practical 
truths  which  form  the  basis  of  natural  religion;  reason  is 
capable,  even  in  its  present  state  of  decadence,  of  acquiring 
of  itself  a  knowledge  of  these.  Thus  reason  may  by  its 
own  light  reach  a  knowledge  of  the  existence  and  unity 
of  God,  of  His  providential  action  upon  man  and  the  world, 
of  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  the  obligation  of  a  moral 
law  with  a  sanction  in  the  future  life — in  a  word,  a  knowledge 
of  the  foundations  of  the  moral  life.  Nevertheless,  if  man- 
kind had  been  abandoned  to  itself,  if  God  had  not  come  to 
its  aid  by  the  light  of  a  positive  revelation,  an  immense 
majority  of  men,  owing  to  want  of  time,  facility,  or  courage, 
would  not  have  attained  a  clear  and  certain  knowledge  of 
these  essential  truths,  or  would  have  attained  them  late 
in  life  and  in  an  imperfect  degree.  And  yet  religion  is 
indispensable  not  only  to  certain  privileged  minds  but  to  all 
men  and  at  all  periods  of  life.  It  would  have  been  still  more 
impossible  to  acquire  a  knowledge  of  truths  in  detail,  and  of 
all  the  natural  duties  of  man  toward  God,  toward  his  neigh- 
bor, and  toward  himself.  To  be  convinced  of  the  weakness 
and  inadequacy  of  reason  left  to  itself,  we  need  only  recall  the 


32  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

monstrous  errors  which,  with  the  exception  of  the  Jewish 
people,  abounded  among  the  nations  of  the  world  before  the 
coming  of  Christ.  What  absurdities  were  taught  in  the  schools 
of  philosophy  itself  on  the  most  important  and  vital  ques- 
tions, questions,  moreover,  which  appear  so  simple  to  minds 
enlightened  by  Christian  faith!  What  monstrous  errors  in 
Plato's  famous  treatise  on  *'  The  Republic '' !  One  of  his  most 
enthusiastic  admirers,  Mr.  Aime  Martin,  rightly  charges 
him  with  cruelty  as  well  as  the  most  flagrant  immorality. 
The  greatest  philosophers  of  antiquity  earnestly  desired  to 
be  enlightened  upon  these  capital  questions,  but  they  ac- 
knowledged that  the  light  must  come  to  them  from  heaven. 
''The  truths  necessary  to  man,"  says  Plato,  ''are  easily 
learned  if  we  are  taught  them,  but  no  one  can  learn  them 
unless  God  shows  him  the  way."  "We  must  wait,"  he  says 
elsewhere,  "until  some  one  comes  to  teach  us  how  we  must 
bear  ourselves  toward  God  and  toward  men."  They  recog- 
nized in  a  still  higher  degree  their  inability  to  raise  the  masses 
from  their  moral  and  intellectual  degradation,  and,  what  is 
more,  it  gave  them  but  Uttle  concern.  How,  indeed,  could 
they  have  succeeded  in  such  an  attempt,  being  themselves 
unable  to  agree  on  the  most  important  truths  and  their  lives 
being  too  often  in  open  conflict  with  their  teaching  ? 

Modern  philosophers  who,  after  so  many  centuries  of 
Christianity,  endeavor  to  answer  by  their  own  light  the 
great  problems  which  unceasingly  perplex  souls,  fall  only  too 
frequently  into  the  most  extravagant  errors  of  antiquity; 
in  the  words  of  St.  Paul,  "They  became  vain  in  their  thoughts, 
and  their  foolish  heart  was  darkened:  for  professing  them- 
selves to  be  wise  they  became  fools."  (Rom.  i.  21,  22.) 
The  history  of  contemporaneous  philosophy  proves  with 
irresistible  eloquence  that  there  is  not  a  single  truth  of  the 
natural  order  which  found  acceptance  among  them. 

Therefore,  it  is  a  moral  necessity  for  mankind,  in  its  present 
condition,  to  learn  by  divine  revelation— a  means  as  safe  as 
it  is  easy— even  the  truths  which,  strictly  speaking,  may  be 


GENERAL   EXPLANATIONS.  33 

discovered  by  the  unaided  reason,  and  the  knowledge  of 
which  is  indispensable  for  the  guidance  of  human  Hfe.  See 
also  Part  I.,  Ch.  III.,  A.  3,  Sect.  8,  and  Part  II.,  Ch.  V. 

To  convince  ourselves  that  this  is  the  doctrine  of  the 
Church  on  the  necessity  of  revelation,  let  us  read  what  the 
Vatican  Council  (Const.  I.  ch.  2.)  teaches  on  the  subject: 
''Holy  Mother  Church  holds  and  teaches  that  God,  the 
principle  and  end  of  all  things,  may  be  known  with  certainty 
through  the  natural  light  of  reason,  by  means  of  created 
things;  for  the  invisible  perfections  of  God  have  become 
visible  since  the  creation  of  the  world,  by  the  knowledge 
which  His  works  give  us  of  Him.  Nevertheless,  it  has 
pleased  the  wisdom  and  goodness  of  God  to  reveal  Himself 
to  us  and  to  reveal  the  decrees  of  His  will  by  another  way 
which  is  supernatural."  This  is  what  the  Apostle  says:  ''God, 
who  at  sundry  times  and  in  divers  manners  spoke  in  times 
past  to  the  fathers  by  the  prophets :  last  of  all,  in  these  days 
hath  spoken  to  us  by  His  Son."  (Heb.  i.  1,  2.)  To  this 
divine  revelation  all  men,  even  in  the  present  state  of  the 
human  race,  owe  the  power  of  knowing  promptly,  unerringly, 
and  vrith  absolute  certainty  those  divine  things  which  are  not 
accessible  to  human  reason.  Nevertheless,  it  is  not  for  this 
reason  that  revelation  is  absolutely  necessary,  but  because 
God,  in  His  infinite  goodness,  has  destined  man  for  a  super- 
natural end,  that  is,  to  participate  in  divine  blessings  which 
completely  surpass  human  intelligence;  for  "eye  has  not 
seen,  nor  ear  heard,  neither  hath  it  entered  into  the  heart 
of  man,  what  things  God  hath  prepared  for  them  that  love 
Him."     (ICor.  ii.9.) 

III.  Object  and  Division  of  this  Course. 

We  have  given  a  brief  summary  of  the  teaching  of  the 
Catholic  Church  on  the  subject  of  religion  and  revelation. 
But  is  this  teaching  founded  on  truth,  is  it  supported  by 
irrefutable  and  absolute  facts?  Has  that  which  God  in 
His  wisdom  and  mercy  could  do  in  favor  of  humanity  been 


34  CHRISTIAN    APOLOGETICS. 

really  done?  In  a  word,  is  there  a  supernatural  religion 
revealed  and  imposed  upon  man  under  pain  of  failing  to 
attain  his  last  end?  What  is  this  religion,  and  where  is  it 
taught  in  all  its  purity  and  integrity? 

The  answer  to  these  questions  will  form  the  subject  of 
this  Course  of  Apologetics.  In  the  first  part  we  shall  prove 
that  God  has  really  revealed  Himself  to  man,  and  that  the 
Christian  religion  is,  since  the  coming  of  Christ,  the  super- 
natural religion  and  obligatory  for  all  men.  In  the  second 
part  we  shall  prove  that  only  the  Catholic  Church  preserves 
this  Christian  religion  in  its  integrity,  and  that  she  alone  is 
charged  to  teach  it  to  the  world. 

IV.  The  Three  Historical  Phases  of  Revealed 
Religion. 

In  order  to  establish  that  the  Christian  religion  is  revealed 
by  God  and  imposed  upon  man,  we  shall  start  with  a  fact 
absolutely  undeniable,  attested  as  it  is  by  all  historic  records. 
This  fact  is  that  there  has  always  existed  on  earth  a  religion 
calling  itself  supernatural  and  revealed  by  God.  We  see  it 
in  the  very  cradle  of  the  human  race  and  throughout  the 
centuries  in  its  various  phases  of  development.  These  phases 
bear  respectively  the  name  of  primitive  or  patriarchal 
religion,  Mosaic  religion.  Christian  religion. 

Let  us  begin  by  giving  an  adequate  idea  of  these  three 
great  historic  phases,  refraining  meanwhile  from  prejudging 
the  divinity  of  any  of  them. 

First  Phase:  Primitive  or  Patriarchal  Religion. 

Primitive  or  patriarchal  religion  is  the  supernatural  religion 
which  God  imposed  upon  our  first  parents  at  the  beginning 
of  their  existence.  It  contained  dogmas  revealed  and 
supernatural — for  example,  the  existence  of  good  and  bad 
angels,  and,  after  the  fall,  the  hope  of  a  liberator ;  it  included 
also  certain  positive  precepts,  such  as  the  observance  of  the 
Sabbath,  the  manner  of  offering  sacrifices. 


GENERAL   EXPLANATIONS.  35 

This  religion  was  binding  upon  all  men;  until  the  coming 
of  Christ  it  sufficed  the  human  race  to  attain  its  end.  There 
was,  however,  one  exception:  from  the  time  of  Moses,  the 
Jewish  people  were  obliged  to  practise  the  Mosaic  religion. 

Primitive  religion  was  to  be  preserved  in  the  human  race, 
on  the  one  hand  by  conscience,  which  dictated  the  precepts 
of  the  natural  law;  on  the  other,  by  means  of  tradition  or 
teaching  passing  from  man  to  man  and  transmitting  the 
knowledge  of  truths  and  of  positive  precepts  added  and 
revealed  by  God.  Unfortunately,  men  by  sin  obscured  the 
ideas  of  the  natural  law:  they  no  longer  read  its  precepts  so 
clearly  in  their  conscience;  they  ceased  to  distinguish  so 
readily  the  good  they  should  do  and  the  evil  they  should 
avoid.  The  tradition  of  truths  and  revealed  precepts  became 
altered  and  corrupted  in  the  course  of  time.^ 

Then  it  was  that  God,  in  order  to  preserve  the  primitive 
religion  in  the  midst  of  the  erring  human  race,  chose  Abra- 
ham and  his  posterity.  Through  these  patriarchs  He  con- 
firmed and  determined  the  previous  revelation;  He  taught 
new  truths  and  imposed  new  precepts,  for  example  the  ob- 
servance of  circumcision.  Primitive  religion  received  its  first 
development  under  the  patriarchs:  hence  its  double  name  of 
primitive  and  patriarchal. 

Second  Phase:  Mosaic  Religion.^ 
Later,  as  man  continued  to  turn  from  the  path  of  righteous- 
ness, God  in  His  infinite  mercy  willed  to  bring  him  back  by 
new  means  which  would  make  salvation  easier  for  him,  and 
prepare  the  way  more  efficaciously  for  the  Messias,  for  the 
Redeemer  promised  after  the  fall.  He  chose  Moses  and  the 
prophets  who  followed  him  to  revive  the  knowledge  of  the 
natural  law  and  of  previous  revelations,  and  to  impose  new 
precepts.    This  new  revelation  was  made,  as  we  know,  on 

^Thebaud,  Gentilism;  Ch.  and  M.  W.,  I.,  ch.  1;  Schanz,  H.,  ch.  1 
ff.;  Lacordaire,  5th  conf.  on  the  Church;  Alzog,  Ch.  Hist.,  I.,  hist, 
in  trod. 

'  DolUnger,  on  Judaism;  Schanz,  II.,  ch.  5;  also  Thebaud  and 
Alzog,  11. cc. 


36  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

Mt.  Sinai  under  circumstances  fitted  to  make  a  deep  and 
lasting  impression  on  the  mind  and  the  heart  of  the  Hebrew 
people. 

The  Mosaic  religion  or  law,  therefore,  is  a  collection  of 
dogmas  and  precepts  revealed  principally  to  the  Hebrew 
people  through  Moses  and  the  other  prophets  who  came 
after  him.  This  law,  which  was,  moreover,  only  the  primitive 
religion  raised  to  a  degree  of  perfection  which  it  hitherto  had 
not  possessed,  was  not  addressed  to  the  whole  world  like  the 
first,  but  only  to  the  Jewish  people;  nor  was  it  destined  to 
embrace  all  times:  its  special  mission  being  to  prepare  the 
coming  of  the  Messias,  it  was  to  last  only  till  this  coming. 
Hence  God  did  not  will  to  perfect  it.  This  perfection,  ac- 
cording to  the  degree  determined  by  the  wisdom  of  the  Most 
High,  was  reserved  for  the  religion  which  the  Messias  was  to 
announce  to  men. 

Third  Phase:  The  Christian  Religion. 

When  the  time  marked  by  the  eternal  decrees  was  accom- 
plished, the  Redeemer  promised  from  the  beginning  of  the 
world  came  to  redeem  men  and  establish  a  religion  which 
was  called  by  His  name,  that  is.  Christian.^ 

The  Christian  religion  or  evangelic  law,  then,  is  that  which 
Christ  Himself  came  to  give  to  the  world.  It  contains 
necessarily,  like  the  others,  the  truths  and  precepts  of  the 
natural  law,  but  it  teaches  them  in  an  eminently  clear, 
certain,  and  perfect  manner;  it  presents,  besides,  a  complete 
collection  of  truths,  of  precepts,  and  of  supernatural  aids. 

The  Christian  religion  abrogated  the  Mosaic  law  in  all  that 
was  special  to  the  Jewish  people,  and  became  the  only  re- 
ligion necessary  to  all  men  until  the  end  of  the  world.  It 
will  not  receive,  like  those  which  preceded  it,  any  ulterior 
development,  Christ  having  given  it  as  perfect  as  God  willed 
it  to  be  for  the  salvation  of  the  human  race. 

Remark. — It  follows  from  what  we  have  said  that  these 
'Schanz,  II.,  ch.  7. 


GENERAL  EXPLANATIONS.  37 

three  religions,  the  Primitive,  the  Mosaic,  and  the  Christian, 
though  different  exteriorly,  are  one  and  the  same  religion, 
developed  by  God  in  the  coarse  of  centuries.  In  fact,  they 
all  three  have  the  same  author,  God;  the  same  supernatural 
end,  the  beatific  vision;  the  same  fundamental  means,  super- 
natural grace  for  the  intelligence  and  the  will ;  all  three  rest 
on  a  Redeemer  who  is  to  come  or  has  come ;  the  decalogue  is 
common  to  them;  the  dogmas,  though  revealed  progressively, 
are  found,  at  least  in  germ,  and  frequently  entire,  in  the  three 
religions.  Hence  it  is  undoubtedly  the  same  religion  which 
has  passed  through  two  preparatory  phases  in  order  to  receive 
finally  in  the  Christian  revelation  its  crown  and  its  definite 
perfection. 

Conclusion. — Such  are  the  facts  attested  by  history  and 
the  traditions  of  the  nations.  It  remains  now  to  learn 
whether,  in  each  of  these  three  phases,  this  religion,  venerable 
certainly  in  its  antiquity,  is  legitimately  entitled  to  claim, 
to  the  exclusion  of  all  others,  a  supernatural  and  divine 
origin.  Is  it  really  God  who,  by  Himself  or  by  means  of 
His  representatives,  revealed  and  imposed  it  on  man?  This, 
let  us  repeat,  is  what  we  propose  to  examine  in  the  first  part 
of  this  course. 

It  will  not  be  necessary,  however,  to  establish  the  proof 
of  this  divine  origin  for  each  of  these  three  phases.  It  follows 
from  the  preceding  exposition  that  the  religion  which  Jesus 
Christ  brought  into  the  world  is,  and  will  be  until  the  end  of 
time,  the  religion  which  all  men  must  embrace  in  order  to  be 
saved:  the  essential  point,  then,  is  to  prove  the  divinity  of  the 
Christian  religion.    This  is  what  we  are  about  to  do. 

Later  we  could,  by  following  an  analogous  method,  estab- 
lish the  divinity  of  these  two  anterior  religious  phases.  But 
we  refrain  in  order  not  to  overburden  our  work  with  proofs, 
particularly  as,  the  divinity  of  Christ's  mission  being  once 
established,  it  will  be  easy,  if  necessary,  to  prove  the  divin- 
ity of  these  two  preceding  revelations:  the  solemn  affirma- 
tion of  Christ  on  the  subject  would  be  amply  sufficient. 


38  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

ART.   II.— EXAMINATION   OF  THREE  PRELIMINARY 
QUESTIONS. 

Before  attempting  to  demonstrate  the  divinity  of  the 
Christian  Rehgion,  it  will  be  well  to  elucidate  three  questions, 
or,  if  you  will,  to  reply  to  three  objections  which  are  stumbling- 
blocks  to  many  minds  in  search  of  religious  truth.  The 
first  concerns  the  role  which  reason  plays  in  the  matters  of 
faith,  or  supernatural  religion;  the  second,  the  mysteries 
which  this  religion  contains;  the  third,  finally,  the  means  by 
which  reason  establishes  with  certainty  the  existence  of  a 
divine  revelation. 

I.  The  Role  of  Reason  in  Matters  of  Faith.* 

Rationalism  claims  that  revelation,  or  faith  in  a  divine 
authority,  annihilates  reason  or  renders  it  absolutely  useless. 
Nothing  is  more  utterly  false  than  this  assertion,  as  we 
have  alread}^  shown  above,  p.  29f. 

1st.  The  Vatican  Council,  1.  c,  ch.  4th,  speaking  of  the 
relations  between  faith  and  reason,  uses  these  words:  ''The 
Catholic  Church  has  always  held,  and  holds  by  perpetual 
consent,  that  there  exist  two  orders  of  knowledge,  distinct 
in  their  principle  and  in  their  object.  In  their  principle, 
because  in  one  we  know  by  natural  reason,  and  in  the  other 
by  divine  faith.  In  their  object,  because  outside  of  things  to 
which  natural  reason  may  attain,  there  are  mysteries  hidden 
in  God,  which  are  proposed  to  our  belief,  and  which  could 
not  be  known  to  us,  if  they  were  not  divinely  revealed." 
Later  on  it  says  further:  ''Though  faith  is  above  reason 
there  can  never  be  any  real  disagreement  between  faith  and 
reason,  for  the  same  God,  who  revealed  the  mysteries  and 
communicated  faith,  has  given  to  the  human  mind  the  light 
of  reason,  and  God  cannot  contradict  Himself,  nor  can 
truth  ever  deny  truth.  .  .  . 

^  Lacordaire's  Conf.,  11-13,  on  the  Doctrine  of  the  Church;  14-20, 
on  Catholic   Doctrine  and  the  Mind;  Ronayne;  Archbp.  Vaughan; 


GENERAL   EXPLANATIONS.  39 

"Not  only  can  faith  and  reason  never  disagree,  but  they 
afford  each  other  a  mutual  assistance;  right  reason  demon- 
strates the  foundations  of  faith,  and,  enlightened  by  the 
light  of  this  faith,  develops  the  knowledge  of  divine  things; 
faith,  on  her  part,  delivers  and  guards  the  reason  from  error 
and  enriches  it  with  divers  kinds  of  knowledge.  Hence  the 
Church,  so  far  from  being  opposed  to  the  study  of  the  arts 
and  human  sciences  commends  such  study  and  furthers  it  in  a 
thousand  ways."  Certainly  nothing  could  be  more  clearly 
and  formally  expressed.  The  same  doctrine  is  fully  stated 
in  the  Encyclical  of  Leo  XIII.,  on  Thomistic  philosophy. 

2d.  This  doctrine  of  the  Church  is  in  conformity  with 
Scripture.  So  far  from  exacting  blind  faith  of  us,  God  even 
forbids  us  to  give  premature  or  unjustifiable  credence  to  any 
word  claimed  to  have  come  from  heaven.  ^'Qui  credit  cito, 
levis  est  corde :  He  that  is  hasty  to  give  credit,  is  light  of 
heart,"  says  Ecclesiasticus  xix.  4.  The  Apostle  St.  John  in 
his  turn  also  warns  us  against  unreflecting  impulse  which 
leads  direct  to  error:  "Believe  not  every  spirit,  but  try  the 
spirits  if  they  be  of  God:  because  many  false  prophets  are 
gone  out  into  the  world."  (1  John  iv.  1.)  St.  Paul  gives  the 
same  recommendation  to  the  Thessalonians :  "Despise  not 
prophecies.  But  prove  all  things:  hold  fast  that  which  is 
good."  (1  Thess.  v.  20,  21.)  By  means  of  this  wise  discern- 
ment we  shall  be  always  ready,  as  St.  Peter  tells  us,  "  to 
satisfy  every  one  that  asketh  you  a  reason  of  that  hope 
which  is  in  you."     (1  Pet.  iii.  15.) 

3d.  Catholic  Theology  teaches  the  same.  It  is  many  years 
since  St.  Thomas,  the  Angel  of  the  schools,  formulated  the 
doctrine  of  the  Church  in  these  terms:  "Reason  would  not 
believe,  if  it  did  not  see  that  it  must  believe."  He  only 
repeated,  moreover,  what  St.  Augustine  wrote  on  the  subject 

Preston,  Reason  and  Revel.;  Gibbons,  Ch.H.;  Hunter,  I.;  D.  R.,  III. 
Ser.  xiv.  243,  xxi.  87,  xxii.  72,  Oct.  1900;  Br.  W.  iii.  (passim),  viii. 
574,  ix.  235,  268;  C.  W.,  xxi.  178,  xxxiii.  289,  xxxviii.  577,  Ixxii.; 
A.  C.  Q.,  vi.  300,  xiii.  1,  xvi.  1;  M.,  June,  Sept.  1899;  I.  E.  R.,  Feb. 
1900;  U.  B.,  Jan.  1895. 


40  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

in  his  letter  to  Consentius:  ''The  Church  exacts  faith;  and 
because  we  have  so  many  reasons  to  beheve,  strong  and  urgent 
reasons,  she  requires  faith  and  humble  submission  to  all  her 
divine  teachings.  Let  her  not  be  accused,  then,  of  requiring 
an  absolute,  blind,  unreasoning  faith,  or  of  insisting  that 
those  who,  in  order  to  believe,  have  used  their  reason  in  the 
salutary  manner  we  have  indicated,  may  not  continue  to 
use  their  reason  to  render  their  faith  ever  more  humble, 
but  also  ever  more  enlightened.  God  forbid  that  our  sub- 
mission to  all  that  is  of  faith,  should  prevent  us  from  search- 
ing and  asking  the  reason  of  what  we  believe,  since  we  could 
not  even  believe  if  we  were  not  capable  of  reasoning ! "  Evidently 
any  revelation  made  by  God  to  mankind  supposes  in  man 
the  corresponding  capacity  of  knowing.  In  this  very  course 
of  apologetics,  to  what  power  of  the  mind  do  we  appeal  if 
not  to  reason?  ''Christian  faith,"  says  Bourdaloue,  " is  not 
any  acquiescence  to  believe  or  any  submission  of  the  mind 
whatever;  it  is  a  rational  assent,  otherwise  it  were  no  longer 
a  virtue.  But  how  can  this  submission  be  rational,  if  reason 
has  no  part  in  it?  What  are  the  proofs  that  will  show  me 
the  religion  I  profess  and  the  mysteries  it  teaches  to  be 
evidently  credible?  This  is  the  important  question  which  I 
must  endeavor  to  grasp,  and  by  careful  study  to  understand; 
here  I  must  bring  my  reason  into  active  play,  for  in  this 
matter  I  am  not  allowed  to  say:  I  shall  not  reason. 
Without  this  strict  examination  and  discussion  my  faith 
will  be  uncertain,  wavering,  and  vague,  without  principle 
and  without  consistency."  ^ 

Conclusion. — Hence  it  is  incontestable,  not  only  that 
Catholic  teaching  accords  reason  a  special  object,  distinct 
from  that  of  faith,  but  that  even  in  the  things  of  faith,  this 
reason  fills  an  important  and  serious  role.  One  part  of  this 
role  is  to  establish  harmony  between  the  various  revealed 
truths,  to  show  the  link  which  unites  them,  to  prove  each 
one  by  fitting  arguments,  and  to  deduce  the  consequences 

'  Rickaby,  Oxf .  Conf.,  I.  S.,  ch.  9. 


GENERAL   EXPLANATIONS.  41 

which  follow  from  them ;  in  a  word,  to  make  these  truths  a 
scientific  whole;  this  is  what  the  Council  calls  developing  the 
science  of  divine  things.  This  is  certainly  a  very  beautiful 
role,  but  there  is  another  much  more  important,  viz.,  demon- 
strating the  truth  of  the  Gospel,  that  is,  establishing  with 
certainty  the  foundations  of  faith  by  demonstrating  that 
it  is  perfectly  rational,  legitimate,  and  indispensable  to 
believe.  According  to  the  Vatican  Council  and  the  Encyclical 
of  Leo  XIII.  already  quoted,  it  belongs  to  reason  to  give 
this  demonstration,  and  we  are  not  permitted,  under  pain 
of  erring  against  faith,  to  deny  it  this  right  and  power.  Let 
us  add  finally,  that  it  also  devolves  upon  reason  to  defend 
revealed  truths  against  the  attacks  of  their  enemies.  "Phi- 
losophy," says  the  same  Pope,  ''bears  a  noble  and  honorable 
title  as  the  bulwark  of  faith  and  the  firm  rampart  of  religion.'' 

What  more  could  they  who  proclaim  themselves  the 
champions  of  human  reason  ask?  No;  it  is  no  longer  pos- 
sible to  claim  with  any  appearance  of  truth  that  the  Catholic 
Church  does  not  recognize  the  rights  of  reason,  that  she 
endeavors  to  crush  reason  under  the  weight  of  authority.  It 
belongs  to  reason  to  prove  that  God  has  spoken  to  men  to 
instruct  them  in  religion  and  their  duties;  but,  once  this  is 
established,  it  is  undeniably  the  duty  of  reason  to  bow 
before  the  sovereign  authority  of  God,  to  admit  His  revealed 
word,  in  short,  to  believe  according  to  His  infallible  testi- 
mony. 

Remark. — It  by  no  means  follows  from  what  we  have  said 
that  reason  directly  produces  faith.  Faith  is  a  supernatural 
gift ;  a  virtue  by  which  we  firmly  believe  the  truths  revealed 
by  God,  because  He  has  revealed  them.  Now,  evidently  the 
natural  cannot  produce  the  supernatural;  hence  reason  only 
prepares  the  way  for  faith  by  examining  the  motives  of  belief. 
Thus,  an  unbeliever  or  a  heretic  who,  by  examining  these 
motives,  is  convinced  of  their  soundness,  and,  consequently, 
of  the  necessity  of  giving  his  assent  to  revealed  truths,  has 
only  a  wholly  human  belief;  in  order  that  his  belief  become 


42  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

a  divine  faith  he  requires  that  a  supernatural  principle, 
that  grace  lead  him  to  believe  these  truths  as  revealed,  that 
is,  on  the  infallible  authority  of  God.^  Let  us  hasten  to 
add  that,  according  to  the  theological  axiom,  facienti  quod 
est  in  se  Deus  non  denegat  gratiam,  this  divine  assistance, 
enlightenment  of  the  mind,  and  impulse  of  the  will,  is  never 
refused  to  a  man  of  good  will,  that  is,  to  one  who  is  perfectly 
sincere  in  seeking  religious  truth.  Such  a  man,  moreover, 
would  never  fail  to  implore  the  divine  assistance  by  humble, 
confident  prayer. 

II.  The  Mysteries  of  Religion. 

Among  the  truths  which  God  has  revealed  there  are 
mysteries,  that  is,  points  of  doctrine  which  reason,  of  itself, 
could  never  have  discovered,  nor  can  it  penetrate  their 
essence  or  intimate  nature,  but  it  admits  their  existence  on 
the  supreme  and  infallible  authority  of  God.  These  truths, 
moreover,  are  far  from  being  unintelligible  to  us;  we  under- 
stand them  sufficiently  to  speak  of  them  intelligently,  to 
avoid  confounding  them  with  others,  and  to  derive  from 
them  salutary  and  persuasive  lessons  of  conduct. 

Is  it  true,  as  rationalists  claim,  that  the  existence  of  these 
mysteries  is  a  sufficient  reason  for  rejecting  a  priori,  that  is, 
without  further  examination,  as  false,  a  religion  which  pro- 
poses them  for  our  belief?  Is  it  necessary  to  understand 
a  truth  in  itself  in  its  essence,  in  other  words,  to  know  perfectly 
the  why  and  wherefore  of  its  existence,  in  order  that  one 
may  believe  it  without  sinning  against  reason?  By  no 
means,  nor  does  it  redound  to  the  credit  of  human  in- 
telligence that  we  need  to  refute  anything  so  absurd  and 
yet  so  general. 

Thesis.  —  It  is  in  no  way  contrary  to  reason,  rather  it  is 
wholly  in  accordance  with  reason,  to  believe  the  mysteries  of 

religion,  once  we  are  certain  that  they  are  revealed  by  God, 

^  On  the  Grace  of  Faith,  see  Rickaby,  Oxf.  C,  I.  S.,  ch.  8,  10; 
Manning,  Int.  Miss.,  ch.  3;  Lacordaire,  conf.  13  on  Doctr.  of  the  Gh. 


GENERAL  EXPLANATIONS.  43 

First  Argument. — If  we  were  to  reject  the  mysteries  of 
religion  because  we  have  not  a  perfect,  an  adequate  knowledge 
of  them,  because  we  do  not  know  or  clearly  understand  the 
why  and  wherefore  of  their  existence,  we  should  be  obliged 
for  the  same  reason  to  reject  all  the  mysteries  of  nature. 
*'We  have  no  complete  knowledge  of  any  thing,"  Pascal  has 
truly  said;  and  this  profound  thinker  goes  so  far  as  to  define 
science: ''  Learning  which  recognizes  its  ignorance.'^  Is  there  a 
scholar  who  completely  understands  even  the  simplest  natural 
phenomena?  Who  has  ever  thoroughly  grasped  the  intimate 
nature  of  heat  and  cold,  of  light,  of  attraction,  of  electricity? 
Who  understands  time,  space,  the  infinite,  eternity?  Who 
understands  the  nature  of  a  simple  grain  of  sand,  the  germi- 
nation of  plants,  life,  sleep,  fatigue,  pleasure,  death?  Who 
understands  the  substantial  union  in  us  of  spirit  and  matter, 
the  intercourse  of  souls,  the  reciprocal  communication  of 
their  thoughts,  their  sentiments,  their  desires  by  a  vehicle 
wholly  material,  speech  or  writing?  Who  understands  what 
takes  place  in  each  of  our  senses,  and  innumerable  other 
things?  Yet  these  are  truths  which  all  the  world  admits, 
though  the  essence  of  these  things  escape  us  and  we  have 
of  the  truths  themselves  only  very  imperfect  ideas  mingled 
with  impenetrable  obscurities. 

Now,  if  it  is  not  contrary  to  reason  to  believe  these  mys- 
teries of  nature  because  their  existence  is  confirmed  by  the 
senses  and  experience,  how  can  it  be  contrary  to  reason  to 
admit  mysterious  truths  of  a  religious  nature  when  a  witness 
whose  authority  is  irrecusable,  God  Himself,  attests  them? 
No  doubt  reason  must,  as  we  have  said,  prove  the  reality  of 
this  testimony;  but,  once  this  is  established,  reason  itself 
makes  it  a  duty  for  us  to  assent  without  hesitation.  The 
most  noble  use  man  can  make  of  his  reason  is  to  submit  it  to 
God,  the  Infinite  Wisdom. 

Second  Argument. — If  it  were  contrary  to  reason  to 
believe  on  reliable  testimony  truths,  the  essence  of  which 
is  impenetrable  to  reason,  we  should  be  obliged  to  say  that 


44  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

it  was  repugnant  to  the  reason  of  an  unlettered  man  to 
admit,  on  the  testimony  of  a  scholar,  the  majority  of  things 
which  the  latter  teaches  him.  In  fact  scientists  undoubtedly 
possess  certain  knowledge  of  many  things  which  are  beyond 
the  intelligence  of  ordinary  minds,  and  which  not  only  seem 
to  them  inadmissible,  but  contrary  to  what  they  believe 
they  daily  witness;  for  example,  that  the  earth  turns  round 
the  sun,  that  a  certain  star  is  a  million  times  larger  than  the 
earth,  that  it  takes  thousands  of  years  for  its  light  to  reach 
us,  that  it  contains  certain  constituent  elements.  Would 
this  unlettered  man  be  acting  contrary  to  reason  in  accepting 
the  testimony  of  a  scientist  worthy  of  belief?  Would  it  be 
unreasonable  or  imprudent  for  a  son,  blind  from  his  birth, 
to  believe  with  entire  faith  and  perfect  confidence  whatsoever 
his  father,  whose  wisdom  and  affection  he  had  a  thousand 
times  experienced,  tells  him  of  the  wonders  his  eyes  discover 
by  means  of  the  telescope?  Yet  does  he  comprehend  any- 
thing whatever  of  the  manner  in  which  these  distant  objects 
are  presented  to  his  father's  vision?  How,  then,  can  it  be 
unreasonable  for  a  Christian  to  believe  mysteries  on  the 
testimony  of  Him  who  is  Truth  itself? 

Third  Argument. — God,  infinite  Intelligence,  must  evi- 
dently know  the  truths  which  are  beyond  the  natural 
power  of  man's  limited  intelligence.  On  the  other  hand, 
it  may  be  most  profitable  for  us  to  be  instructed  concerning 
the  existence  of  these  truths  in  order  to  know  God's  designs, 
His  acts  of  goodness,  of  mercy,  of  justice  in  behalf  of  human- 
ity; in  order  to  have  an  adequate  idea  of  these  things,  with- 
out, however,  comprehending  them,  or  penetrating  the  inti- 
mate nature  of  them.  Finally,  He  who  has  given  man  ears  to 
hear,  intelligence  to  understand,  and  speech  to  communicate 
his  thoughts  to  his  fellow-men,  surely  does  not  lack  means  of 
imparting  to  His  creature  these  elevating  and  salutary  truths. 

Remarks. — We  would  add  to  these  arguments  a  few 
remarks  which  will  confirm  what  we  have  advanced  by 
removing  all  misapprehension. 


GENERAL   EXPLANATIONS.  45 

1st.  The  difficulty  we  experience  in  believing  the  mysteries 
of  religion  is  frequently  due  to  the  fact  that  we  form  an 
erroneous  idea  of  them.  If,  for  example,  in  regard  to  the 
mystery  of  the  Trinity,  we  were  asked  to  believe  that 
three  distinct  natures  are  but  one  and  the  same  nature,  or 
that  three  distinct  persons  are  but  one  person,  this  dogma 
would  be  evidently  contrary  to  reason  and  consequently 
inadmissible.  In  fact,  reason  shows  us  clearly  that  one  can- 
not be  the  same  as  three.  But  such  is  not  the  mystery 
revealed.  If  it  is  above  reason,  it  is  in  no  way  contrary  to  it ; 
nor  does  it  contradict  the  immutable  principles  which  reason 
reveals  to  us.  Religion,  in  fact,  says  only  that  the  three 
Persons  in  God  are  but  one  nature.  The  unity  and  trinity 
are  not  affirmed  under  the  same  relations  but  under  different 
relations:  the  unity  concerns  the  nature,  while  the  trinity  is 
affirmed  of  the  persons.  No  doubt  our  limited  intelligence 
could  not  of  itself  discover  this  mysterious  truth,  the  object 
of  which  is  the  intimate  nature  of  an  infinite  being;  but  there 
is  nothing  opposed  to  our  believing  it  on  the  authentic  testi- 
mony of  God  Himself. 

What  we  have  just  said  of  the  mystery  of  the  Holy  Trinity 
applies  to  that  of  the  Incarnation  and  to  all  other  mysteries. 
All  are,  it  is  true,  beyond  reason  in  the  sense  indicated  above, 
but  none  are  contrary  to  reason.^ 

2d.  Mysteries,  to  a  reasoning  man,  are  far  from  being  an 
obstacle  to  admitting  a  religion  which  contains  them;  their 
very  existence  is  a  presumption  in  its  favor.  The  absence  of 
all  mystery  should,  on  the  contrary,  make  its  authenticity 
doubtful.  In  fact,  reason,  as  we  have  just  seen,  finds  im- 
penetrable obscurities  even  in  the  sphere  of  natural  truths; 
everywhere  it  finds  itself  forced  to  recognize,  and  accept  as 
certain,  things  which  are  obscure  and  incomprehensible. 
Why,  then,  should  we  not  encounter  obscurities  and  incom- 
prehensibilities in  religion,  that  is,  in  the  relations  between 

*  Newman,  Discourses  to  Mixed  Congregat.,  xiii.,  xiv.,  xv.;  Br.  W., 
viii.  28;    M.  1902,  Nov.,  Dec. 


46  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

God  and  man?  How  can  our  finite  intelligence  fathom  the 
unsearchable  depth  of  an  infinite  being?  Should  we  not  justly 
regard  as  insensate  a  man  who  would  dare  to  say:  "1  am 
capable  of  knowing  God  as  far  as  He  can  be  known,  as  far 
as  He  knows  Himself;  I  can  penetrate  His  nature  and  His 
perfections,  His  will  and  His  acts  in  regard  to  man;  there  is 
nothing  in  their  infinity,  in  their  eternity,  in  their  supreme 
elevation,  which  is  beyond  or  impenetrable  to  my  reason"?  * 
The  reply  which  we  shall  give  to  the  following  question 
will  further  confirm  what  we  have  said  on  the  subject  of 
belief  in  mysteries.  We  shall  see  that  there  are  innumerable 
facts  and  truths  to  which  we  accord  reasonable  belief  without 
any  direct  knowledge  of  them  and  without  understanding 
their  intimate  nature. 

III.  The  Criterion  of  Certainty  in  Matters  of  Faith. 
We  have  seen  but  a  short  time  since  that  it  belongs  to 
reason  to  prove  not  only  that  it  is  not  absurd  to  believe 
revealed  truths,  but  that  it  is  insensate  and  impious  not  to 
believe  all  that  God,  infinite  Intelligence  and  infallible  Truth, 
has  deigned  to  reveal  to  man,  even  mysteries.  But  we 
may  ask  ourselves  how  reason  succeeds  in  establishing  these 
grounds  of  faith,  how  it  proves  to  itself  that  God  has  re- 
vealed to  man  certain  truths  and  certain  precepts,  with  the 
obligation  to  believe  them  and  conform  his  life  thereto? 

Philosophy  mentions  different  means  or  sources  of  attain- 
ing certain  knowledge  which  rests  in  every  case  upon 
evidence.^  These  sources  are  experience,  reason,  and 
testimony. 

1st.  Experience  may  be  either  internal  or  external.  The 
first,  by  the  help  of  the  internal  sense,  or  consciousness,  per- 
ceives immediately  our  subjective  modifications,  our  inter- 
nal and  personal  acts  and  facts,  whether  of  the  mind  or 
the  will  or  the  whole  human  compound.    The  latter,  by 

*  Lacordaire,  5th  conf.  on  God  and  Man. 

^  Rickaby,  First  Principles  of  Knowledge;  Mivart,  Nature  and 
Thought,  ch.  2;  Poland,  The  Truth  of  Thought. 


GENERAL   EXPLANATIONS.  47 

means  of  the  external  senses  and  the  impressions  made  upon 
them  by  external  objects,  makes  us  know  these  objects,  the 
existence  of  bodies,  their  quahties  and  properties,  and  in 
this  way  reveals  to  us  the  material  world  and  its  wonderful 
changes  and  motions. 

2d.  Reason  works  upon  the  material  supplied  by  experience; 
it  penetrates  the  nature  of  things  and  discovers  the  relations 
which  exist  between  the  various  beings.  The  acts  we  thus 
perform  are  of  two  kinds:  (a)  acts  of  intelligence,  by  which 
we  perceive  at  a  glance  universal,  necessary,  immutable  truths, 
the  denial  of  which  would  imply  contradiction — for  example, 
that  the  whole  is  greater  than  one  of  its  parts;  that  that 
which  exists  is  possible;  that  a  thing  cannot  at  the  same 
time  exist  and  not  exist ;  (b)  acts  of  reasoning,  by  which  we 
deduce  certain  ideas  from  other  ideas,  conclusions  from  their 
principles.  Reason  enables  us  to  infer  from  the  existence  of  a 
finite,  contingent  world  the  existence  of  God,  a  necessary 
being  and  first  cause  of  all  things. 

3d.  Testimony  or  authority  gives  us  a  knowledge  of  beings 
and  events  of  which,  being  separated  from  them  by  time  or 
space,  we  can  have  no  experience;  thus  by  means  of  testi- 
mony we  attain  the  certain  knowledge  of  historical  and 
geographical  facts,  such  as  the  exploits  of  Alexander,  the 
existence  of  San  Francisco,  Thibet.^ 

It  is  important  to  observe  here  that  each  of  these  three 
means  enables  us  to  attain  perfect  certainty.  I  am  abso- 
lutely certain  of  the  existence  of  my  body,  of  the  reality  of 
the  things  I  see  or  touch,  of  the  existence  of  the  universe,  in 
a  word,  of  all  the  things  coming  under  my  own  experience. 
I  am  absolutely  certain  that  everj^  effect  has  a  cause,  that 
God  exists,  etc.,  though  these  truths  are  beyond  the  reach 
of  experience.  I  am  equally  certain  of  the  conquests  of 
Caesar,  the  victories  of  Napoleon,  the  existence  of  Rome, 
and  an  infinite  number  of  facts  in  history,  geography, 
and  natural  science.  Under  pain  of  being  unreasonable  I 
*  Fitz-Arthur;  Rick^b;^,  1.  c,  p.  377  ff.;  Poland,  1.  c,  ch.  14. 


48  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

must  admit  these  facts  on  the  strength  of  testimony  worthy 
of  behef. 

It  is  true  that  truths  proved  by  testimony  do  not  induce 
the  assent  of  the  intelhgence  as  irresistibly  as  truths  of 
immediate  intuition,  such  as  axioms ;  but,  on  the  other  hand, 
it  would  be  absurd  to  exact  this  immediate  and  irresistible 
evidence  when  there  is  question  of  historical  and  geographi- 
cal truths,  and  in  general  of  remote  objects  or  exterior  facts 
which  the  senses  cannot  attain;  at  the  same  time  it  is  evident 
that  these  truths  are  no  less  certain. 

Evidence  is  what  determines  the  assent  of  our  intelligence 
to  a  tenet  or  truth.  Now  this  evidence  may  be  intrinsic 
(internal),  that  is,  inherent  in  the  tenet  or  doctrine  itself; 
or  it  may  be  extrinsic  (external),  in  which  case  it  may  be 
called  the  evidence  of  the  credibility  of  the  doctrine  proposed. 
Let  us  explain.  Certain  doctrines  or  propositions  brought 
before  our  intelligence  are  themselves  endowed  with  such  a 
clear  light  that  the  mind  without  denying,  in  a  measure, 
its  own  nature  cannot  refuse  to  admit  their  truth.  Such 
is,  for  instance,  that  first  principle:  A  thing  cannot  at  the 
same  time  be  and  not  be.  With  other  propositions  there 
may  be  need  of  a  long  process  of  reasoning  (argument) 
before  we  perceive  their  truth.  Of  this  kind  are  many 
propositions  in  algebra  and  geometry.  However,  by  the 
very  fact  that  our  mind  clearly  sees  the  intimate  connec- 
tion of  these  theorems  with  evident  principles  the  conclu- 
sion itself  becomes  evident.  Finally,  there  are  other  prop- 
ositions or  tenets  for  which  our  assent  is  asked,  although 
they  do  not  show  forth  that  light  of  evidence.  Do  what  we 
may,  they  remain  for  us  enshrouded  in  obscurity  and  mys- 
tery. But  suppose  men  of  irreproachable  probity  assure  me 
that  they  have  heard  these  propositions  from  the  mouth 
of  God,  suppose  I  am  certain  that  they  speak  without  any 
personal  interest  whatever;  nay,  more,  for  the  truth  which 
they  proclaim  they  suffer  insults,  persecution  and  death 
itself,  while,  on  the  other  hand,  their  teaching  is  confirmed 


GENERAL   EXPLANATIONS.  49 

by  striking  and  incontestable  miracles.  Would  it  not  be 
unreasonable,  under  these  circumstances,  to  refuse  my  assent 
to  their  doctrines? 

Another  important  remark.  If  the  internal  evidence 
shining  forth  in  certain  metaphysical  and  mathematical 
truths  were  always  required  to  justify  our  intelligence  in 
giving  a  firm  assent,  there  would  be  no  longer  any  historical, 
geographical,  and  natural  sciences,  for  the  simple  reason 
that  the  facts  or  results  of  these  sciences  consist  mostly  of 
knowledge  acquired  by  means  of  testimony  (extrinsic  evi- 
dence). What  scientist  has  ever  by  his  own  personal 
experience  verified  all  the  facts  related  in  scientific  works  and 
accepted  by  him  as  undoubtedly  true.  If  he  honestly  analyzes 
the  reasons  of  his  convictions,  will  he  dare  to  affirm  that  all 
of  them  rest  upon  evidence  free  from  the  slightest  cloud? 

Conclusion. — Let  us  now  apply  what  we  have  just  said 
to  the  question  of  revelation  or  supernatural  religion.  Reve- 
lation is  a  fact,  an  exterior  act  dependent  on  the  will  of  God; 
furthermore,  it  is  a  fact  removed  from  us  by  many  cen- 
turies. Hence  it  is  authority  or  testimony  which  enables  us 
to  attain  certain  knowledge  of  revelation  and,  consequently, 
to  demonstrate  the  foundations  of  faith.^ 

Remarks. — 1st.  According  to  the  definition  of  the  Vatican 
Council,  faith  is  a  supernatural  virtue  whereby,  inspired  and 
assisted  by  God's  grace,  we  believe  as  true  the  things  which 
He  has  revealed,  not  because  we  perceive  their  intrinsic 
truth  by  the  natural  light  of  reason,  but  because  of  the 
authority  of  God  Himself  who  has  revealed  them,  and  who 
can  neither  be  deceived  nor  deceive  (C.  I.  ch.  3).  Faith, 
like  every  virtue,  is  a  principle  of  free  acts  which  are  meri- 
torious before  God.  Yet  faith  is  an  act  of  the  intellect, 
and  the  intellect  is  not  a  free  power:  its  assent  is   neces- 

^  Hettinger,  Nat.  Rel.  (Introduct.) ;  Brann,  Truth  and  Error; 
Ward,  Theism,  I.  pp.  1,  120,  II.  pp.  107,  244;  C.  W.  xxix.  11;  D.  R., 
Oct.  '92,  p.  365;  Chatard,  Essay  19;  Newman,  Discourses  to  Mixed 
Congr.,  X.,  xi.;  Manning,  The  Grounds  of  Faith,  lect.  1, 


50  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

sarily  determined  by  evidence.  The  explanation  of  this 
apparent  difficulty  is  that  free-will  enters  largely  into 
the  birth  and  development  of  a  supernatural  act  of  faith: 
this  is  what  makes  the  act  the  homage  of  human  reason 
to  the  Divine  Wisdom. 

It  may  be  well  to  explain  one  of  the  ways  by  which 
man's  free-will  intervenes  in  an  act  of  faith.  We  have  only 
to  observe  our  own  mental  activity,  however  briefly,  to 
see  that  few  truths  are  privileged  to  produce  certainty  by 
means  of  absolute  evidence  which  convinces  the  reason. 
There  is  much  knowledge  rightly  called  certain  in  which, 
however,  this  character  of  certainty  is  not  evident.  Facts, 
sometimes,  present  luminous  sides,  while  other  parts  are 
obscured  by  shadows.  This  obscurity  wearies  and  dis- 
concerts our  intelligence,  and  our  first  impulse,  yielding  to  a 
movement  of  pride,  is  simply  to  reject  a  truth  which  is  not 
clearly  and  completely  revealed  to  us.  Here  is  where  the 
will  intervenes  to  oblige  our  intelligence,  despite  its  repug- 
nance, to  accept  truths,  which  though  not  completely  evi- 
dent, are  presented  with  sufficient  clearness  to  leave  no  room 
for  pncdent  doubt.  In  very  many  cases  this  intervention 
of  the  will  in  the  act  of  cognition  takes  place  spontaneously. 
There  are  many  special  facts  in  regard  to  which  no  one 
would  venture  to  claim  that  he  is  guided  only  by  complete 
and  infallible  evidence.  The  affirmation  of  our  senses  and 
the  testimony  of  our  fellow  men  constantly  form  for  us  the 
starting  point  or  basis  of  the  most  important  resolutions.  To 
reject  whatsoever  is  not  sustained  by  absolute  evidence  would 
be  to  condemn  one's  self  to  the  most  desolate  scepticism. 

The  application  of  the  foregoing  explanation  to  the  truths 
of  revelation  follows  of  itself.  As  many  of  these  truths  are 
not  self-evident,  and  yet  the  assent  of  our  intelligence  thereto 
is  required  by  God,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  will  to  intervene  in 
order  to  oblige  our  reason  to  accept  the  truths  on  testimony 
recognized  to  be  from  God.^ 

*  Ward,  The  Wish  to  Believe;  Hedley,  The  Spirit  of  Faith;  Manning, 


GENERAL   EXPLANATIONS.  51 

The  necessity  of  this  intervention  of  the  free-will  appears 
more  clearly  still  when  we  consider  the  difficulties  in  the 
way  of  the  firm  and  persevering  assent  demanded  by  divine 
revelation.  In  order  to  believe  man  must  often  conquer  three 
enemies  at  the  same  time:  pride,  which  revolts  against  the 
acceptance  of  truths  which  reason  cannot  understand;  the 
terror  of  sensual  passions,  which  tremble  in  view  of  the  chains 
to  be  imposed  on  them  by  the  practical  truths  of  faith;  the 
tyranny  of  human  respect,  and  the  fear  of  the  dangers  and 
sacrifices  to  which  the  pubHc  profession  of  the  CathoUc  faith 
often  exposes  its  followers.  We  can  easily  understand  that 
under  such  conditions  the  intellect  as  well  as  the  will  stand  in 
need  of  supernatural  help,  of  that  spiritual  power  which  in 
the  Christian  language  is  called  the  grace,  the  Hght,  or  the 
gift  of  faith. 

2d.  From  what  has  been  said,  it  follows  that  when  arguing 
with  unbelievers  we  must  never  promise  to  satisfy  their  loud 
demand  for  absolute  evidence  of  revealed  truths.  This  would 
be  to  forget  the  essential  character  of  Catholic  faith.  What 
we  may  stoutly  maintain  is,  first,  the  perfect  satisfaction 
that  our  dogmas,  even  the  most  mysterious,  offer  to  the  de- 
mands of  the  highest  and  most  exacting  intellect;  secondly, 
the  authenticity,  integrity,  and  truthfulness  of  our  sacred 
books,  particularly  of  the  Gospels,  as  perfect  as  that  of  the 
most  rehable  historical  documents;  finally,  the  divine  char- 
acter of  the  Christian  religion  and  the  Catholic  Church  shown 
in  each  motive  of  credibility  and  shining  forth  in  real  splendor 
from  the  full  cluster  of  all  these  motives.  Moreover,  it  can 
be  shown  most  clearly — with  a  clearness  approaching  abso- 
lute evidence — that  the  unbelief  of  the  rationalist  is  contrary 
to  sound  reason,  that  it  brings  misery  to  its  followers,  and 
that  it  constitutes  one  of  the  most  serious  dangers  threaten- 
ing the  individual  as  well  as  society.  What  more  can  a 
rational  mind  demand? 

Internal  Mission;  Lacordaire,  6th  conf.  on  God  and  Man,  13th  conf. 
on  the  Church;  Br.  W.  v.  496  ff. 


CHAPTER  II. 

HISTORIC  VALUE  OF  THE  BIBLE. 

Supernatural  religion  supposes  a  divine  revelation,  which 
in  turn  establishes  the  truth  of  that  supernatural  religion. 
But  revelation,  being  an  historical  fact,  must  be  proved  by 
testimony  carrying  with  it  certainty.  Where  shall  we  find 
these  unimpeachable  testimonies  of  God's  successive  com- 
munications with  man?  They  are  contained  in  the  holy  books 
written  under  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  for  this 
reason  enjoying  for  long  centuries  an  exceptional  and  well- 
deserved  veneration.^  Collectively  they  are  called  ''The 
Holy  Scriptures"  or  ''The  Bible,"  and  are  divided  into  the 
Old  and  New  Testaments.^ 

The  Old  Testament. — The  name  Old  Testament  is  given 
to  the  inspired  books  written  before  the  coming  of  Christ. 
They  are  forty-five  in  number,  and  may  be  divided  into  four 
classes. 

1st.  The  historical  books,  which  relate  the  history  of  religion 
from  the  creation  to  the  time  of  Christ.  The  principal  one 
of  these  is  the  Pentateuch  of  Moses,  containing  five  parts  or 
books:  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers,  and  Deuter- 
onomy.    It  includes  the  period  which  elapsed  between  the 

^  Tradition  is  another  source  from  which  the  Church  draws  her 
knowledge  of  revealed  truths.  We  shall  speak  of  it  shortly  in  the  2d 
part,  ch.  2,  art.  2,  IV. 

^  See  the  beautiful  10th  conf.  by  Lacordaire  (on  the  Church),  about 
the  Bible  and  pagan  sacred  books.  On  the  inspiration,  canonicity, 
authenticity,  and  integrity  of  the  Bible  and  its  separate  books  consult 
the  so-called  "  Introductions  to  the  Sacred  Scriptures "  by  Gigot, 
Breen,  Dixon,  and  MacDevitt. 


HISTORIC  VALUE  OF  THE   BIBLE.  53 

creation  and  the  death  of  Moses.  Then  come  the  other  his- 
torical books  which  resume  this  history  at  the  period  of  the 
entrance  to  the  promised  land  and  carry  it  on  to  the  coining 
of  the  Redeemer.  These  are  the  book  of  Josue;  that  of 
Judges; the  four  books  of  Kings;  the  two  books  of  Paralipo- 
menon;  the  two  books  of  Esdras,  the  second  of  which  is 
also  called  Nehemias,  and  the  two  books  of  Maccabees.  Be- 
sides this  general  history,  there  are  five  books  which  contain 
only  special  histories:  such  are  the  books  of  Job,  Ruth, 
Esther,  Tobias,  and  Judith. 

2d.  The  books  of  praise,  or  chants  addressed  to  the  Di- 
vinity :  these  are  the  Psalms  and  the  Canticle  of  Canticles. 

3d.  The  books  of  morals,  which  give  rules  for  the  conduct 
of  hf e :  these  are  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  Wisdom,  and  Eccle- 
siasticus. 

4th.  The  books  of  the  Prophets,  which  reprove  the  people 
for  their  vices,  predict  the  chastisements  which  threaten 
them,  and  above  all,  announce  the  coming  of  the  Messias. 
The  Prophets  are  sixteen  in  number:  Isaias,  Jeremias,  with 
Baruch,  Ezechiel  and  Daniel,  the  four  principal  ones,  are 
called  the  great  Prophets  because  of  the  importance  of  their 
works.  The  others,  who  because  of  their  lesser  works  are 
called  the  minor  Prophets,  are  twelve  in  number:  Osee,  Joel, 
Amos,  Abdias,  Jonas,  Micheas,  Nahum,  Habacuc,  Sophonias, 
Aggeus,  Zacharias,  and  Malachias. 

The  New  Testament. — The  New  Testament  is  com- 
posed of  inspired  books  written  after  the  coming  of  Christ  and 
at  the  time  of  the  Apostles.  They  include  twenty-seven 
books  which  we  divide  into  four  categories. 

1st.  The  Gospels,  which  contain  the  history  of  the  life  and 
of  the  ministry  of  Jesus  Christ,  His  doctrine.  His  death  and 
His  resurrection.  These  Gospels,  which  are  four  in  number, 
have  respectively,  as  authors,  St.  Matthew,  St.  Mark,  St.  Luke, 
St.  John. 

2d.  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  that  is,  the  relation  of  the  acts 
of  the  Apostles,  of  what  they  did  to  establish  and  promulgate 


54  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

the  Gospel.  This  narration,  the  author  of  which  is  the  Evan- 
gehst  St.  Luke,  the  disciple  of  St.  Paul,  goes  as  far  as  the 
first  captivity  of  St.  Paul  at  Rome. 

3d.  The  Epistles,  or  letters  of  the  Apostles  written  to  the 
different  churches,  and  even  to  individuals,  to  give  them 
counsel  and  to  instruct  them.  We  count  fourteen  of  St. 
Paul,  three  of  St.  John,  two  of  St.  Peter,  one  of  St.  James  and 
one  of  St.  Jude. 

4th.  The  Apocalypse  or  revelation  made  to  St.  John  in  the 
Island  of  Patmos. 

Inspiration  of  the  Bible.  Our  Present  Point  of 
View. — It  is  extremely  important  to  determine  very  accu- 
rately the  point  of  view  from  which  we  here  regard  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  particularly  the  Pentateuch  and  the  Gospels.  In 
the  eyes  of  a  Catholic  all  the  books  just  mentioned  have  a 
sacred  character.  They  are  given  him  by  the  Church  as 
divinely  inspired,  that  is,  dictated  by  the  Holy  Ghost  to  the 
biblical  writers.  Therefore,  God  Himself  is  their  author.  To 
avoid  any  errors  on  this  subject  let  us  state  briefly  what  the 
Catholic  Church  means  by  this  inspiration}  God  by  an 
efficacious  influence,  either  exterior  or  interior,  impels  a  man 
to  write;  He  makes  known,  with  more  or  less  detail,  the 
things  He  wishes  written  by  the  hand  of  this  man,  and,  while 
the  writer  is  laboring  to  execute  the  divine  idea,  the  Holy 
Spirit  assists  and  guides  him  that  there  may  be  nothing  in 
his  writing  contrary  to  the  designs  of  Him  whose  instrument 
he  is.  At  the  same  time  this  man  is,  under  God's  hand,  a 
living  instrument  endowed  with  intelligence  and  will;  and 
God,  in  employing  him,  does  not  prohibit  him  the  exercise 
of  this  double  faculty.  That  is  to  say.  He  permits  man  to 
conceive  after  his  own  manner  the  divine  thought  which  He 
communicates  to  him,  and  to  choose  the  manner  which  suits 

^Manning,  Essays,  II.  Ser.;  Humphrey,  Written  Word,  ch.  1,  2; 
U.B.,  Apr.  '97;  D.  R.  III.  Ser.  xx.  144,  July  '93,  p.  532;  C.  W.  xxxiii. 
523,  Ivi.  742,  Ivii.  206,  396;  Br.  W.  vi.  427;  I.  E.  R.,  Jan.,  Mch.  '95; 
Walworth,  ch.  17;  Schanz,  II.,  ch.  13;  Hunter,  I.;  Gigot,  lect.  10. 


HISTORIC  VALUE   OP  THE   BIBLE  56 

him  to  express  it;  one  thing  is  guaranteed  by  the  divine 
Author:  that  His  thought  shall  be  faithfully  rendered  by 
the  hagiographer.  At  times,  it  is  true,  God  dictates  to  man 
the  very  words  by  which  the  divine  thought  must  be  ex- 
pressed; but  usually  these  words  and  the  arrangement  of  the 
details  of  the  inspired  writing  are  left  to  the  choice  of  the 
writer  under  the  direction  and  with  the  assistance  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  At  times  God's  thought  is  manifested  to  the 
writer  without  any  effort  on  his  part;  at  other  times  He 
wishes  that  the  author  contribute  personally  by  preliminary 
or  concomitant  labor  to  the  conception  of  the  divine  idea. 
He  in  no  way  prohibits  the  author,  for  example,  from  making 
use,  while  engaged  in  his  historic  labor,  of  preexisting  records, 
from  having  recourse  to  his  memory,  from  making  researches, 
from  questioning  witnesses  of  events.  Every  proposition 
thus  written  under  divine  inspiration,  is  the  word  of  God, 
the  truth  of  which  is  infalHble.  Hence  the  Bible  as  a  whole 
as  well  as  in  all  its  parts  is  invested  with  divine  authority. — 
Leo  XIII.,  Encyclical  on  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

It  is  not  to  this  divine  authority,  however,  that  we  shall 
appeal  in  the  studies  which  follow.  The  apologist,  propos- 
ing to  establish  the  premises  of  faith,  cannot  appeal  to  in- 
spiration, the  existence  of  which  is  affirmed  only  by  faith 
and  the  infallible  teaching  of  the  Church.  Therefore,  we 
must  completely  set  aside,  for  the  moment,  the  divine  inspira- 
tion of  the  sacred  books  and  consider  only  their  historic  value; 
the  same  as  if  we  were  considering  the  Commentaries  of 
Caesar  or  the  Annals  of  Tacitus.  Do  those  sacred  books, 
simply  as  historic  documents,  deserve  our  full  and  entire 
confidence?  We  insist  that,  thus  regarded,  the  books  of  both 
the  Old  and  the  New  Testament  possess  an  authority  so  cer- 
tain, so  well  established  that  we  cannot  doubt  it  without 
absolutely  denying  all  historic  certainty.  This  is  what  we 
shaU  first  demonstrate.^ 

'  Gigot,  lect.  2. 


56  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 


ART.  I.— AUTHORITY  OF  THE  PENTATEUCH.* 

Preliminary  Observation. — If  an  historical  book  is  to 
be  an  unimpeachable  authority  and  command  our  confi- 
dence, three  conditions  are  necessary.     It  must  be : 

1st.  Authentic,  that  is,  written  by  the  author  to  whom  it  is 
attributed,  or,  if  the  author  is  unknown  or  doubtful,  at  the 
period  assigned  to  it. 

2d.  Intact,  that  is,  it  must  have  come  to  us  just  as  it  left 
the  pen  of  the  author,  without  having  undergone  any  sub- 
stantial alteration  bearing  on  the  main  subject  of  the  history. 

3d.  Truthful:  the  moral  qualities  of  the  author  and  the 
circumstances  under  which  it  was  written  should  protect  it 
against  all  suspicion  of  error  or  falsehood.  When  an  his- 
torical work  fills  these  three  conditions,  no  reasonable  man 
can  refuse  to  admit  the  facts  contained  therein.  Now  such 
are  the  books  which  compose  the  Holy  Scripture.  We  are 
about  to  establish  this  specially,  in  regard  to  the  Pentateuch,^ 

^  If  we  had  only  simplicity  of  method  in  view,  there  would  be 
reason  to  ask  if  it  were  opportune  to  treat  here  the  questions  contained 
in  the  two  articles  which  follow,  particularly  in  article  2d.  Un- 
doubtedly, if  our  only  object  were  to  make  the  divinity  of  the  Christian 
religion  very  clear,  we  should  not  hesitate  to  omit  this  discussion, 
for  the  New  Testament  would  be  amply  sufficient  for  our  purpose. 
But  we  deem  these  pages  useful  in  other  respects.  If,  however,  a 
reader  lacks  time  to  study  seriously  the  whole  Course,  he  may,  with- 
out detriment  to  the  soundness  of  the  general  demonstration,  pass 
over  article  3d  of  the  present  chapter.  It  is  true  that  among  the 
proofs  which  we  give  of  the  divinity  of  Christianity  there  is  one 
very  important  which  rests  on  the  fulfilment  in  Jesus  Christ  of 
the  Messianic  prophecies;  but  in  order  that  this  proof  preserve  all 
its  apologetic  value,  it  is  enough  that  we  be  perfectly  certain  that 
these  prophecies  existed  and  were  known  long  before  they  were  ful- 
filled. Now,  of  this  there  can  be  no  doubt;  every  one  knows  that 
the  Greek  version  of  the  Septuagint  had  spread  the  knowledge  of  them 
everywhere,  more  than  250  years  before  Christ. 

^Bissell;  Thein,  The  Bible  and  Rationalism,  p.  L;  Schanz,  II.,  ch. 
12;  Walworth,  ch.  3  ff.;  Burnett,  Why,  etc.,  ch.  9,  10;  D.  R.,  Apr. 
'92,  p.  264,  Oct.  '92,  p.  245,  Jan.  '93,  p.  40;  M.  S.  H,  1900. 


HISTORIC   VALUE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  57 

the  most  important  of  the  historical  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, containing  as  it  does  the  account  of  the  creation,  the 
fall,  etc.  We  shall  do  the  same  afterward  for  the  Gospels, 
the  principal  historic  basis  of  the  Christian  Revelation.  As 
for  the  other  books  of  the  Old  as  well  as  the  New  Testament, 
which  will  be  less  useful  to  us  in  this  treatise,  analogous  proofs 
may  be  found  in  special  works.* 

I.  Authenticity  of  the  Pentateuch. 
Thesis.     The  Pentateuch  is  the  work  of  Moses,  the 
Lawgiver  of  the  Hebrews. 

First  Argument. — The  authenticity  of  the  Pentateuch  is 
superabundantly  proved : 

1st.  By  the  traditional  testimony,  as  unanimous  as  con- 
stant, of  ancient  and  modern  Jews.  After  their  departure 
from  Egypt,  these  books  were  always  in  the  hands  of  the 
whole  nation,  and  they  always  insisted  that  they  were  the 
work  of  Moses,  who  had  delivered  them  from  the  bondage  of 
Egypt.  Moreover,  all  the  sacred  writers,  from  Moses  to  Jesus 
Christ,  cite  or  pre-suppose  the  Pentateuch  of  Moses  to  have 
come  from  him.  It  is  the  same  with  the  profane  writers  of 
the  nation,  such  as  Philo  and  Josephus,  and  all  the  Talmudists 
and  Rabbins.  Finally,  in  our  own  day  also,  the  Jews,  who, 
by  a  phenomenon  unique  in  history,  continue  to  exist  though 
scattered  throughout  all  the  nations  of  the  world,  certify  the 
same  thing  to  us,  though  these  books  condemn  them. 

2d.  By  the  testimony  of  the  Samaritans,  who,  despite  their 
profound  hatred  of  the  Jews,  preserved  the  Pentateuch  and 
never  ceased  to  attribute  it  to  Moses;  whence  we  must  con- 
clude that  at  the  time  of  the  separation  of  the  ten  tribes,  about 
a  thousand  years  before  Christ,  its  authenticity  must  have 
been  incontestably  and  universally  acknowledged. 

3d.  By  the  testimony  of  a  multitude  of  other  writers 

Wn  Biblical  Criticism  see  A.  C.  Q.  xix.  412,  562;  I.  E.  R.,  1892, 
'93/94,1901,1902;  M.  S.  H.,  1900;  Wiseman,  Science  andRev.  Rel., 
1.10. 


58  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

among  the  nations  of  antiquity,  Pagan,  Egyptian,  Greek, 
Roman,  etc.,  who  admitted  the  Pentateuch  as  the  work  of 
Moses  and  as  containing  his  legislation.  Even  Celsus, 
Porphyrins,  and  Julian  the  Apostate,  though  it  was  their 
capital  interest  to  deny  the  authenticity  of  this  book,  never 
accused  the  Jews  or  the  Christians  of  supporting  their  doc- 
trines with  apocryphal  documents. 

4th.  By  the  testimony  of  Jesus  Christ  and  the  Apostles: 
whenever  they  name  the  Pentateuch  or  the  Law  they  attrib- 
ute it  to  Moses.^  Let  us  add  further  the  testimony  of  all 
Christians  whether  Catholics  or  heretics. 

These  extrinsic  proofs  based  on  testimony  are  amply  suffi- 
cient. If  we  admit  the  authenticity  of  Virgil 's  ^neid,  of  the 
Philippics  of  Demosthenes,  etc.,  on  the  faith  of  testimony, 
we  cannot  reasonably  deny  the  authenticity  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, attested  by  just  as  great  a  number  of  unassailable 
witnesses.  Let  us  add,  however,  other  arguments  which  are 
equally  significant,  and,  first  of  all,  an  intrinsic  proof,  drawn 
from  a  careful  study  of  the  text  itself. 

Second  Argument. — All  that  the  Pentateuch  contains  in 
point  of  religion,  of  history,  of  politics,  of  geography,  of  morals, 
of  customs,  reveals  the  great  antiquity  of  the  book,  and  is 
in  perfect  harmony  with  the  time  of  Moses;  this  minute 
accuracy  in  the  very  circumstantial  narrations,  abound- 
ing with  a  multitude  of  details  fully  verified  by  the 
study  of  the  Egyptian  monuments,  could  not  be  explained 
at  a  less  ancient  period.  Thus  what  he  tells  of  Egypt  when 
speaking  of  the  sojourn  of  the  Hebrews  there  and  their  flight 
agrees  perfectly  with  the  condition  of  the  country  under 
Ramses,  a  condition  quite  different  from  what  it  was  at  a 
later  period,  e.  g.  of  Solomon  or  the  prophets.  What  we  shall 
say  later  on  (p.  130)  of  modern  discoveries  in  Egypt  and 
Assyria  goes  to  show  that  such  exactness  in  the  smallest 
details  points  necessarily  to  an  author  who  lived  at  the  time 
and  the  places  of  which  he  speaks.     Let  us  observe,  however, 

^  See,  e.g.,  Luke  xxiv.  27;  John  v.  46. 


HISTORIC   VALUE  OF   THE   BIBLE.  59 

that  there  is  a  small  number  of  supplementary  details  which 
were  added  after  the  death  of  Moses,  the  chief  of  which  is  the 
story  of  the  death  of  the  Lawgiver  himself  (Deuter.  xxxiv.) . 
The  study  of  language  leads  to  the  same  conclusion.  With- 
out entering  into  particulars,  which  space  does  not  permit, 
we  would  merely  observe  that  the  books  of  Moses  possess 
an  inimitable  character  of  poetry,  originality,  and  simphcity, 
which  give  a  special  impression  of  antiquity.  The  antiquity 
of  the  language  is  apparent  in  several  archaisms,  such  as 
the  absence  of  any  distinction  between  the  masculine  and 
feminine  genders  in  the  third  person  of  the  personal  pronoun. 
The  masculine  inflection  takes  the  place  of  the  feminine  in 
195  passages  of  the  Pentateuch,  while  in  the  book  of  Josue 
the  distinction  between  the  genders  appears  to  be  fully  estab- 
Ushed.  Another  characteristic :  the  only  strange  words  found 
in  the  Pentateuch  are  Egyptian.  Finally,  it  is  important  to 
observe  that  the  general  unity  which  characterizes  the  five 
books  of  the  Pentateuch  indicates  one  and  the  same  author. 
The  style  of  Moses  is  moreover  very  personal  and  very 
succinct.^ 

It  would  be  ridiculous  to-day  to  object  that  writing  was 
not  invented  at  that  time,  particularly  in  the  face  of  recent 
discoveries  which  show  us  that  the  art  of  writing  was  known 
in  Egypt  at  least  two  centuries  before  the  time  of  Moses. 

Third  Argument. — There  is  question  here  of  a  book  that 
is  both  national  and  religious,  of  a  book  which  contains  the 

^  Certain  rationalists  of  the  present  day,  headed  by  Wellhausen; 
Kuenen,  and  Reuss,  acknowledge  Moses  as  the  author  of  the  decalogue, 
but  refuse  to  see  in  the  Pentateuch  anything  but  fragments,  docu- 
ments of  various  authors  and  epochs,  compiled  by  an  awkward  hand, 
perhaps  by  Esdras.  They  display  much  erudition  in  defence  of  their 
system;  but,  on  close  examination,  the  want  of  logic  in  their  demon- 
strations is  very  evident;  arbitrary  decision  and  prejudice  are  evident 
at  every  step.  See  Vigouroux,  Les  livres  saints  et  la  critique  ration- 
aliste,  tome  3.  It  is  admitted,  however,  that  Moses  inserted  in 
Genesis,  with  little  or  no  alteration,  certain  oral  traditions  and  even 
certain  written  fragments,  the  authenticity  of  which  was  known  to 
him.    This  is  not  the  place  to  give  the  reasons  for  this  supposition. 


60  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

legislation  itself  of  the  Jewish  people,  the  sum  of  their  laws, 
religious,  political,  civil,  and  military;  of  a  book  by  which 
the  religion,  the  police,  the  morals  of  this  people  were  regu- 
lated with  much  precision  and  detail.  It  is  absolutely  im- 
probable that  a  book  of  this  kind  could  be  apocryphal.  We 
might  just  as  well  say  that  the  Code  Napoleon  is  falsely 
assigned  to  the  emperor  whose  name  it  bears,  or  that  the 
American  constitution  was  not  framed  by  the  delegates  of 
the  United  States. 

II.  Integrity  of  the  Pentateuch. 

First  Argument. — Let  us  observe,  first,  that  the  greater 
part  of  the  arguments  which  go  to  prove  the  authenticity 
of  the  Pentateuch  makes  the  integrity  of  the  work  equally 
clear,  at  least  in  the  sense  that  nothing  substantial  has  been 
added.  Yet  there  is  no  want  of  special  proofs.  Studies 
made  of  this  subject,  particularly  those  of  Kennicot,  which 
embraced  581  manuscripts,  and  those  of  J.  B.  Rossi,  which  in 
eluded  825  others,  demonstrate  that  we  possess  in  its  integrity 
the  Hebrew  text  of  the  Old  Testament.  Nor  has  it,  more- 
over, been  possible  to  produce  any  evidence  capable  of  weak- 
ening the  constant  and  public  tradition  of  the  Jews  relative 
to  integrity  of  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

Second  Argument. — Any  essential  alteration  would  have 
been  impossible.     In  fact, 

a.  According  to  the  testimony  of  Flavins  Josephus,  the 
Pentateuch  was  so  famihar  to  the  Jews  that  they  even  knew 
how  many  times  each  letter  was  repeated  in  the  volume. 
''No  one,"  he  says,  ''would  have  dared  to  add  or  take  from 
it,  or  to  make  the  slightest  change  in  the  work.  We  hold 
them  to  be  divine,  we  so  call  them,  we  promise  to  observe 
them  faithfully,  and  gladly  to  die,  if  necessary,  in  their 
defence." 

h.  This  book  being  the  foundation  of  the  life  of  the  Jews, 
any  change  in  it  would  necessarily  have  entailed  change  in 


HISTORIC   VALUE    OF   THE    BIBLE.  61 

their  beliefs,  their  moral  code,  their  laws  and  their  customs 
which  could  not  fail  to  excite  earnest  protest.^ 

c.  It  is  evident  that  any  alteration  was  still  more  impos- 
sible after  the  separation  of  the  ten  tribes. 

d.  Finally,  we  have  a  still  stronger  guarantee  in  the  Greek 
translation  of  the  Septuagint  which  was  made,  according 
to  the  most  probable  opinion,  by  order  of  the  king  of  Egypt, 
Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  and  which  was  known  throughout  the 
entire  world  from  the  year  277  before  Christ,  that  is,  long 
before  the  fulfilment  of  the  prophecies  relating  to  the  Messias. 

III.  Veracity  of  the  Pentateuch. 

Moses  is  veracious  if  he  was  not  deceived,  or  if  he  did  not 
wish  to  deceive.  This  will  be  still  more  evident  if  we  prove 
that  he  could  not  deceive. 

1st.  Moses  was  not  deceived. 

a.  In  regard  to  the  events  of  his  time,  that  is  to  say,  in  re- 
gard to  those  related  in  the  last  four  books  of  the  Pentateuch, 
Moses  was  in  a  position  to  know  them,  since  they  were  tan- 
gible events  and  of  extreme  importance,  events  also  in  which 
he  himself  was  actor  or  witness,  and  which  he  prepared, 
directed,  or  accomphshed. 

b.  He  derived  authentic  knowledge  of  anterior  events  from 
living  tradition,  the  preservation  of  which  was  favored  by 
the  longevity  of  the  first  men.  Though  we  may,  with  reason, 
attribute  to  providential  intervention  the  perfect  preserva- 
tion of  these  patriarchal  traditions,  yet  we  have  no  need,  in 
order  to  explain  it,  to  have  recourse  to  miracles  properly  so 
called.  In  fact  the  events  related  by  Moses  were  well  known 
and  of  the  greatest  importance ;  there  are  several  the  mem- 
ory of  which  is  perpetuated,  according  to  the  custom  of  the 
times,  by  canticles,  by  inscriptions,  and  by  monuments 
raised  to  commemorate  them. 

2d.  Moses  did  not  wish  to  deceive. 

a.  History  and  tradition  agree  in  representing  Moses  as  a 
*  Bossuet,  Discourses  on  Universal  History,  Part  2,  ch.  3. 


62  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

man  of  great  virtue,  perfect  integrity,  and  irreproachably 
impartial.  His  integrity  always  inspired  the  most  absolute 
confidence,  so  much  so  that  his  book  became  the  rule  of  life 
for  the  Jewish  people. 

h.  His  writings  bear  the  imprint  of  the  most  perfect  sin- 
cerity and  integrity ;  his  style  itself  shows  the  tranquil  loyalty 
of  a  writer  who  has  no  reason  to  fear  contradiction :  it  is  sim- 
ple, unpretentious,  free  from  exaggeration,  enthusiasm,  and 
flattery.  Nowhere  does  the  author  disguise  the  faults  of 
his  ancestors  or  the  evil  incHnations  of  his  people,  his  own 
weakness,  and  the  chastisements  which  followed  both.  It 
is  everywhere  apparent  that  his  object  is  only  to  record  and 
preserve  the  memory  of  events  known  to  his  contemporaries 
as  well  as  to  him. 

3d.  Moses  could  not  deceive. 

a.  The  events  which  Moses  relates,  and  of  which  he  was  the 
author  or  witness,  are  striking  public  events  of  the  highest 
importance ;  upon  them  are  founded  the  pohtical  and  relig- 
ious legislation  of  his  nation,  and  the  authority  which  he 
claimed  for  himself.  He  records  the  events,  not  in  a  vague, 
general  way,  but  with  every  detail  of  circumstance,  place,  and 
person.  "  Forget  not,  "  he  tells  them,  'Hhe  words  that  thy 
eyes  have  seen. "  "  Thy  eyes  have  seen  the  great  things  which 
thy  God  has  done  for  thee.  "  (Deut.  iv.,  viii.,  xi.)  If  these 
alleged  facts  were  false,  would  the  Jews,  always  so  ready  to 
murmur  against  their  liberator,  have  made  no  protest,  par- 
ticularly when  the  writer  imposed  upon  them,  in  the  name 
of  God,  duties  very  painful  to  their  carnal  nature?  The  very 
feasts  of  the  Jews,  religious  and  civil,  such  as  the  Passover, 
Pentecost,  Tabernacles;  the  ceremonies  in  use  among  them, 
like  those  of  redeeming  the  first-born ;  their  sacred  canticles, 
which  go  back  to  the  time  of  Moses,  attest  the  continuance 
of  the  marvels  which  m.arked  the  departure  from  Egypt,  the 
publication  of  the  Law  on  Mt.  Sinai,  the  sojourn  in  the  desert, 
and  all  the  great  miracles  worked  in  their  favor  through  the 
ministry  of  Moses  himself. 


HISTORIC   VALUE    OF   THE    BIBLE.  63 

b.  The  events  of  which  he  was  neither  the  author  nor  wit- 
ness must  have  been  fresh  in  the  minds  of  the  entire  people. 
There  is  nothing  comparable  to  the  care  and  fidehty  with 
which  the  Orientals  preserve  and  transmit  the  reports  of 
important  events  connected  with  their  ancestors.  It  would 
have  been  impossible  for  Moses  to  add  to  or  take  from  these 
popular  traditions  without  offending  the  most  cherished 
sentiments  of  the  people  and  exciting  the  most  violent 
protests. 

ART.  II.— THE  PENTATEUCH   AND  THE  SCIENCES.^ 

'^  Science, "  says  Joseph  de  Maistre,  ^^is  a  species  of  acid 
which  dissolves  all  metals  but  gold."  Only  that  which  is 
divine  resists  the  attacks  of  modern  criticism.  Christianity 
certainly  has  not  lacked  assailants,  and  if  it  has  stood  un- 
daunted, without  losing  one  of  the  dogmas  it  professes  or  one 
of  the  facts  it  guarantees,  it  is  because  it  is  of  Heaven,  as  it 
claims  and  proves.  The  sciences,  in  our  century  particularly, 
have  been  brought  under  contribution  to  overthrow  the  rock 
upon  which  it  rests,  but  so  far  from  suffering  injury  thereby, 
the  profound  studies  to  which  scholars  have  devoted  them- 
selves with  noble  ardor  only  confirm  the  authenticity  of  the 
Mosaic  relation.  Not  infrequently,  it  is  true,  scientific  dis- 
coveries have  seemed,  at  first,  to  contradict  the  veracity  of 
the  sacred  text ;  but  when  the  arduous  labors  of  the  pioneers 
of  science  have  led  them  deeper,  and  finally  revealed  unde- 
niable truths,  these  alleged  contradictions  have  vanished, 
and  the  truth  of  the  sacred  writings  shines  with  greater 
brilliancy  than  ever. 

To  us  who  are  Catholics  this  result  is  not  astonishing.  We 
know  with  absolute  certainty  that  no  conflict  is  possible  be- 
tween faith  and  science.    The  reason  of  this  is  simple :  it  is  the 

*  On  the  various  subjects  of  this  article  see  Reusch,  Schanz,  I.,  Mol- 
loy,  Thein,  Vahey;  also  Wiseman,  Science  and  Rev.  Religion;  Zahm, 
Science,  Bible,  and  Faith;  Gmeiner,  Scientific  Views. 


64  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

same  God,  it  is  the  Creator  of  all  things  who  is  at  the  same 
time  the  Lord  of  science  and  the  Author  of  revelation.  What- 
ever the  means  by  which  He  communicates  to  us  a  portion 
of  the  truth,  whether  He  reveals  it  directly  to  man,  or  dis- 
covers it  gradually  to  the  laborious  investigations  of  scholars, 
God  cannot  contradict  Himself,  hence  true  science  can  never 
contradict  revelation.^ 

But  we  cannot  be  satisfied  with  this  summary  affirmation. 
Particularly  as  alleged  objections  furnished  by  geology, 
paleontology,  and  other  sciences  ^  of  which  we  hear  so  much, 
have  not  only  proved  a  stumbling-block  to  many  in  their 
search  for  religious  truth,  but  have  wrecked  the  faith  and 
caused  the  spiritual  ruin  of  souls.  The  religious  convictions 
of  many  have  been  overthrown  by  the  oft-repeated  asser- 
tions that  science  is  incompatible  with  revelation ;  that  mod- 
ern discoveries  evince  the  impossibility  of  miracles,  and  prove 
the  absurdity  of  Christian  dogmas.  It  is  important  that 
Catholic  youth  be  able  to  show  the  inanity  of  these  lying 
affirmations;  they  must  be  able  to  refute  specious  objections, 
and  thus  take  from  many  of  their  brethren  obstacles  to  the 
attainment  of  that  truth  which  was  revealed  for  the  salva- 
tion of  souls.  For  this  reason  we  shall  review  the  principal 
objections  raised  in  the  name  of  science  against  the  Mosaic 
narration,  on  the  subject  of  the  age  of  the  world,  of  the 
work  of  the  six  days,  of  the  antiquity  of  man,  etc.  But  a 
few  general  remarks  are  necessary  first;  they  will  serve  to 
fix  the  reciprocal  position  of  Holy  Scripture  and  science. 

First  Remark. — Holy  Scripture  is  in  no  way  a  scientific 

*  Cf.  references  on  p.  38. 

^  Among  the  sciences  usually  called  modern  because  of  the  great 
progress  they  have  made  in  our  centuries,  we  refer  particularly  to 
geology,  or  the  science  of  the  earth;  astronomy,  or  the  science  of  the 
heavens;  biology,  or  the  science  of  life;  paleontology,  or  the  science 
of  fossils;  anthropology,  the  object  of  which  is  the  origin  of  man,  his 
constitution,  the  unity  of  his  species,  and  his  antiquity;  ethnology, 
or  the  science  of  peoples,  that  is,  their  antiquity,  their  tongues  or 
idioms,  their  morals,  customs,  writings  and  monuments, 


HISTORIC   VALUE   OF   THE   BIBLE.  65 

hook} — Even  when  it  touches  upon  phenomena,  the  proper 
subject  of  science,  its  end  is  not  to  solve  problems  of  geology 
or  astronomy,  but  to  teach  us  the  truths  of  faith  and  to  set 
forth  the  facts  of  religion.  Thus  when  Moses  relates  the 
creation,  he  proposes  to  reveal  and  affirm  the  dogma  and  the 
fact  of  divine  creation  in  regard  to  all  categories  of  beings; 
to  establish  in  this  way  the  foundations  of  natural  religion 
and  the  obligation  of  observing  the  Sabbath.  His  object  is 
by  no  means  to  teach  natural  history,  to  formulate  a  theo- 
retic and  complete  geogony,  to  describe  scientifically  the  suc- 
cessive formations  of  the  globe  which  we  inhabit.  Hence 
when  we  interpret  Scripture  it  must  be  in  this  doctrinal  and 
religious  sense,  and  not  for  the  purpose  of  seeking  formulas 
to  solve  the  disputed  questions  of  scientists. 

Second  Remark. — Nevertheless,  though  the  intention  of 
the  Spirit  of  truth  was  not  to  teach  profane  science,  yet  He 
could  not  have  inspired  what  is  false  even  upon  a  subject 
foreign  to  dogma  and  morality,  nor  have  permitted  the  Sacred 
Scripture  to  set  forth  anything  of  the  kind.  Scripture, 
therefore,  cannot  present  as  true  things  which  science  proves 
to  be  false. 

But  if  the  sacred  writer  is  never  deceived  in  regard  to  the 
precise  object  of  his  statement,  there  is  nothing  to  prevent 
his  using  expressions,  metaphors,  figures  scientifically  inac- 
curate, strictly  speaking,  but  conformable  to  the  genius  of 
the  language  in  which  he  expresses  himself,  or  to  the  habit 
of  mind  of  the  people  whom  he  addresses.  A  few  examples 
will  explain  our  thought. 

When  Josue  wrote  that,  owing  to  the  miraculous  length- 
ening of  the  day  (due  perhaps  to  a  local  and  atmospheric 
modification),  he  was  able  to  achieve  the  battle  of  Gabaon, 
he  related  a  certain  fact.  But  to  state  this  fact,  and  to  be 
imderstood  by  the  people,  he  used  a  popular  term  which 
expressed  very  clearly  what  he  wished  understood:  he  said 
that  the  sun  stood  still.    This  is  the  language  of  appearances. 

*  Reusch,  ch.  3. 


66  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

In  this  respect,  moreover,  the  example  of  Josue  is  still  followed 
by  the  greatest  scholars  and  even  by  the  Bureau  of  Longitudes. 
Notwithstanding  the  progress  of  astronomy,  we  still  say  that 
the  sun  rises  and  sets;  and  we  should  make  ourselves  ridic- 
ulous if,  adopting  strictly  astronomical  language,  we  were 
to  say,  the  earth  sets,  the  earth  will  rise  to-morrow.  It  mat- 
ters Httle,  moreover,  whether  Josue  was  or  was  not  ignorant 
of  the  scientific  truth  of  this  fact.  The  illustrious  astronomer 
Kepler,  referring  to  these  words  of  Josue,  says:  ''The  Scrip- 
ture in  teaching  sublime  truths  makes  use  of  ordinary  locu- 
tions in  order  to  be  understood.  It  speaks  of  natural  phenom- 
ena only  incidentally,  and  in  terms  common  and  familiar  to 
men.  We  astronomers,  ourselves,  while  perfecting  astro- 
nomical science  do  not  perfect  language;  we  say  with  the 
people,  the  planets  stop,  the  planets  return;  the  sun  rises, 
the  sun  sets,  it  rises  in  the  heavens;  hke  tlie  people  we  ex- 
press what  appears  to  pass  before  our  eyes,  though  in  reality 
it  is  not  true.  We  have  less  reason  to  require  that  Holy  Scrip- 
ture abandon,  in  this  respect,  ordinary  for  scientific  language 
which  would  perplex  the  simple  faithful  and  fail  to  attain  the 
sublime  end  it  proposes."  Another  famous  astronomer, 
Arago,  speaks  in  the  same  terms. 

Another  example.  Moses  speaks  of  the  sun  and  moon  as 
two  great  luminaries  destined  to  light  the  earth,  and  he  insists 
less  upon  the  innumerable  multitude  of  stars.  The  reason 
of  this  is  that  he  does  not  pretend  to  give  an  astronomical 
classification;  he  expresses  himself  according  to  popular 
ideas;  he  speaks  of  nature  as  the  people  apprehended  it  and 
according  to  the  relative  importance  of  the  stars  to  inhabit- 
ants of  the  earth.  Again,  when  he  enumerates  the  various 
animals  he  is  not  anxious  to  give  a  complete  scientific  enu- 
meration, he  is  satisfied  to  make  it  understood  that  all  were 
created  by  God.^ 

^  It  will  be  well  to  say  a  few  words  here  in  regard  to  a  biblical 
fact,  the  history  of  Jonas,  which  has  excited  the  ridicule  of  certain 


HISTORIC   VALUE   OF   THE    BIBLE.  67 

Third  Remark. — Scientists  have  no  reason  to  complain 
of  being  hampered  by  CathoUc  theology  in  their  scientific 
studies,  and  particularly  in  their  researches  in  regard  to  the 
formation  of  the  globe.  So  far  from  barring  the  path  of 
science,  the  Church  leaves  it  full  Hberty  to  move  and  progress 
in  the  vast  domain  which  God  has  abandoned  to  it.  She 
applauds  its  efforts,  certain  in  advance  that  its  discoveries  will 
only  confirm  revealed  truths.  Thus,  the  scholar  possessed 
of  faith  finds  himself  as  much  at  ease  in  his  geological  studies, 
for  example,  as  the  scholar  who  has  not  the  happiness  to 
believe. 

Only  recently  has  Leo  XIII.  proclaimed  that  ''the  Church 
does  not  forbid  scientific  labors,  each  science  in  its  own 
sphere  making  use  of  the  principles  and  methods  proper 
to  it, "  and  he  affirms  that  there  is  no  conflict  to  fear,  provided 
they  remain  within  their  own  limits  without  invading  the 
province  of  philosophy  and  of  faith.^  ''Religion,"  said 
Bishop  Freppel  at  the  last  session  of  the  Scientific  Congress 

men  of  the  present  day  as  it  did  that  of  the  pagans  of  Africa  who 
were  answered  by  St.  Augustine.  The  fact  is  evidently  miraculous, 
for  the  prophet  could  not  naturally  live  three  days  in  this  dark  prison 
and  be  cast  forth  whole  and  sound  on  the  shore ;  but  are  we  to  regard 
the  swallowing  of  Jonas  by  the  whale  as  still  another  miracle?  Yes,  if 
the  monster  which  devoured  him  was  really  a  whale;  as  a  matter  of  fact 
the  oesophagus  or  gullet  of  this  mammifer  is  too  narrow  to  permit  a  man 
to  pass.  But  the  Hebrew,  which  is  the  original  text,  does  not  define 
the  monster  in  question.  It  merely  says  it  was  a  great  fish — a  term 
which,  in  its  vulgar  acceptation,  includes  all  sea-monsters  without 
exception,  the  cetacea  as  well  as  the  fish  properly  so  called.  The 
word  employed  by  the  Septuagint  version  is  not  more  precise.  This 
is  the  opinion  of  the  best  commentators,  Jews,  Protestants,  and 
Catholics.  It  seems  preferable  to  suppose  it  a  fish  of  the  genus  Pristis, 
as  represented  in  the  frescoes  of  the  catacombs  and  the  monuments  of 
the  first  ages,  or,  better  still,  of  the  genus  Squalus,  like  the  shark  or 
lamia.  These  fish  have  always  inhabited  the  Mediterranean,  and 
there  are  some  of  them  so  enormous  that  they  could  easily  swallow 
a  man  without  crushing  him,  as,  in  fact,  they  have  been  known  to  do. 
^  C.  W.  xlvii.  225,  xlviii.  145;  Month,  liv.  474;  also  references  on 
pp.  38,  56,  and  63. 


68  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

in  Paris,  1891,  '^does  not  mean  in  any  manner  whatever  to 
restrain  the  normal  and  regular  growth  of  human  science 
any  more  than  she  claims  to  issue  a  doctrinal  judgment  upon 
the  merit  of  an  oratorical  or  literary  work.  It  is  hardly 
necessary  to  say  that  the  Church  has  received  no  revelation 
from  her  divine  Founder,  whether  on  the  properties  of  material 
bodies  or  upon  the  relations  of  distance  and  space  existing 
between  the  stars.  In  other  words,  and  I  use  them  in  their 
precise  meaning,  there  is  no  revealed  astronomy,  nor  medi- 
cine, nor  chemistry,  nor  physics.  These  are  all  natural  sci- 
ences, which  by  their  proper  and  specific  subject  build  up  their 
own  temples  and  to  whom  theology  can  lend  neither  the  laws 
of  their  operations  nor  the  method  of  their  development.'' 
And  in  fact  these  confhcts  can  only  arise  on  the  side  of  false 
science,  that  quasi-science  which,  going  beyond  its  province 
and  abandoning  the  method  proper  to  it,  endeavors  to  over- 
throw the  truths  of  religion  in  the  name  of  arbitrary  hypoth- 
eses unverified  by  facts  and  experience.  But  this  alleged 
science  becomes  anti-religious  only  when  it  ceases  to  be  serious 
and  positive  and  consequently  of  authority.  Certainly  we 
do  not  forbid  scholars  to  formulate  imaginary  hypotheses  in 
order  to  attain,  eventually,  positive  conclusions;  we  only 
forbid  them  to  present  such  things  as  obstacles  to  revealed 
truth  as  long  as  they  are  only  gratuitous  hypotheses. 

What,  then,  is  the  method  proper  to  these  sciences  and 
from  which  they  must  not  depart? 

Here  is  the  answer  given  to  this  question  by  M.  Berthelot, 
whose  efficiency  is  well  known:  ''Positive  science  proceeds 
by  establishing  facts  and  by  uniting  them  one  to  another  by 
immediate  relations.  .  .  .  The  human  mind  verifies  the  facts 
by  observation  and  by  experience;  it  compares  them  and 
draws  relations  therefrom ;  that  is,  more  general  facts,  which 
are  in  their  turn  (and  this  is  their  only  guarantee  of  reafity) 
verified  by  observation  and  by  experience.  It  is  the  chain 
of  relations  which  constitutes  positive  science."  This  is  the 
language  of  the  most  reliable  scholars.    They  are  equally 


HISTORIC   VALUE    OF   THE   BIBLE.  69 

unanimous  in  regard  to  the  object  of  these  sciences,  and  to 
the  province  to  which  they  must  confine  themselves.  The 
same  M.  Berthelot  proclaims  that  they  have  not  to  occupy 
themselves  '^  either  ^vith  first  causes  or  the  end  of  things. '' 
''Experimental  science/'  says  M.  Pasteur  in  his  turn/ 'is 
essentially  positive  in  this  sense,  that  in  its  conceptions  the 
consideration  of  the  essence  of  things,  of  the  origin  of  the 
world  and  its  destinies,  never  enters."  The  illustrious  Claude 
Bernard  also  declares  that  the  essence  of  things  must  remain 
unknown  in  positive  science.  Certainly  this  spiritual-minded 
savant  did  not  repudiate  metaphysics;  he  only  protested 
against  mixing  methods.  There  is  no  one,  not  even  Littre 
himself,  who  does  not  recognize  that  "  experience  has  no  value 
in  questions  of  essence  and  of  origin."  Such  is  the  language 
held  by  all  in  pursuit  of  science  that  is  true  and  serious  and 
not  a  matter  of  fancy  and  imagination.  As  long  as  the  nat- 
ural sciences  are  faithful  to  this  method  of  observation,  of 
experience,  of  induction,  the  only  method  by  which  they  can 
attain  certainty,  as  long  as  they  keep  within  their  proper 
province,  they  may  boldly  pursue  their  investigations  and 
redouble  their  efforts:  never  will  they  encounter  hindrance 
of  any  kind  from  theology. 

Fourth  Remark. — Moreover,  the  bibUcal  affirmations  in 
regard  to  facts  concerning  science,  and  for  which  the  Church 
exacts  respect,  are  very  jew  in  number.  The  reason  is  simple 
and  follows  from  what  we  have  just  said:  the  Bible  being  a 
religious  and  not  a  scientific  book,  whenever  it  touches  upon 
the  phenomena  of  nature  it  is  only  to  teach  men  whatever 
relates,  in  this  matter,  to  their  faith  and  conduct.  By  taking 
successively  the  principal  objections  formulated  against  the 
Mosaic  narration,  it  would  be  an  easy  matter  to  show  that 
these  rare  truths  are  in  no  way  contradicted  by  the  certain 
conclusions  of  modem  sciences. 

Fifth  Remark. — Let  us  add  another  very  important 
remark.  In  order  that  there  be,  on  a  point  touching  nature, 
any  opposition  between  the  Bible  and  science,  the  union  of 


70  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

three  conditions  is  necessary.  1st.  The  exact  and  natural 
meaning  of  the  Scripture  must  be  absolutely  certain,  either 
because  this  meaning  is  completely  self-evident  or  because  it 
is  fixed  by  the  infallible  authority  of  the  Church.  2d.  The 
affirmation  of  science  must  be  incontestable  and  admitted  by 
all  judges  of  undisputed  authority.  3d.  There  must  be, 
finally,  absolute  incompatibility  between  the  certain  sense  of 
the  Bible  and  the  result  obtained  and  perfectly  demonstrated 
by  science.  Now,  these  three  conditions  have  never  been 
encountered  together  and  never  can  be. 

First  Condition. — Apart  from  the  small  number  of  truths 
clearly  affirmed  by  the  authority  of  the  Church,  it  is  difficult 
to  fix  in  a  certain  manner  the  literal  sense  of  the  Bible  in  these 
kinds  of  passages.  We  speak  particularly  of  the  narration 
of  the  creation  made  by  Moses  in  the  first  chapters  of  Genesis, 
for  it  is  here  particularly  that  objections  arise.  It  is  well 
known  that  this  exposition  of  the  work  of  creation,  of  the 
formation  of  our  earth,  has  received  on  the  part  of  the  Fathers 
of  the  Church  and  of  exegetes,  the  most  varied,  not  to  say 
the  most  opposite  interpretations.  Now  it  is  a  fundamental 
principle  in  hermeneutics  that,  in  things  left  by  God  and  by 
the  Church  to  free  discussion,  each  one  must  guard  against 
giving  his  private  interpretation  as  the  absolute  word  of  the 
Bible. 

It  is  beyond  all  doubt  that  full  certainty  accompanies 
the  interpretations  of  Scripture  texts  sustained  by  the 
unanimity — at  least  moral  unanimity — of  the  Fathers  and 
Doctors  of  the  Church;  provided,  however,  it  is  a  doctrinal 
text,  that  is,  contains  doctrinal  or  moral  teaching,  and  that 
the  Fathers  give  their  interpretation  as  being  that  of  the 
Church  and  imposing,  consequently,  faith  upon  the  faithful: 
^'  In  matters  of  faith  and  morals  belonging  to  the  edification 
of  Christian  Doctrine,"  say  the  Councils  of  Trent  and  the 
Vatican.  Then,  and  then  only,  are  the  Fathers  and  Doctors 
of  the  Church  invested  with  higher  authority,  because  in 
cases  of  this  kind  their  teaching  represents  or  manifests  the 


HISTORIC   VALUE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  71 

authentic  teaching  of  the  universal  Church,  which  in  virtue  of 
the  promise  of  her  divine  Founder  is  infalhble.  Outside  such 
cases  we  are  in  no  way  bound  by  the  scientific  ideas  of  the 
ancient  Fathers.  In  their  exegetical  labors  they  accepted  the 
sciences  as  they  were  apprehended  in  their  time;  we  are  as 
free  as  they  to  avail  ourselves,  in  explaining  the  Scripture, 
of  the  progress  which  these  sciences  have  made  in  our  day. 
The  condition  which  we  have  just  specified  cannot  be  verified 
relative  to  the  Mosaic  account  of  the  creation. 

Second  Condition. — For  a  conflict  to  be  possible  it  is  also 
necessary  that  the  scientific  affirmation  be  absolutely  incon- 
testable. Now  in  the  majority  of  sciences  pitted  against 
the  Bible  this  certainty  can  rarely  be  claimed.^  To  convince 
ourselves  of  this  we  have  only  to  consider  the  number  and 
variety  of  systems  which  have  successively  claimed  pre- 
eminence, pronouncing  all  others  absurd. 

Geology  and  paleontology,  particularly,  should  beware  of 
establishing  as  axioms  deductions  still  doubtful,  of  pro- 
claiming as  certain  theories  simply  possible,  hypotheses 
still  unverified  and  unsupported  by  absolutely  certain  proofs. 
No  doubt  these  sciences  have  made  remarkable  progress  in 
modem  times,  and  we  are  agreed,  for  example,  in  regard  to 
the  grand  divisions  of  the  strata  of  the  earth,  of  the  chrono- 
logical classification  of  certain  groups  of  fossils.  But,  again, 
the  apologist,  upon  these  capital  and  well-estabhshed  points, 
has  no  difficulty  in  showing  that  the  Bible  in  no  way  con- 
tradicts scientific  data.  In  regard  to  certain  details  of 
science,  concerning  which  we  are  far  from  certain,  we  may 
and  should,  before  taking  the  trouble  to  examine  them  from 
a  theological  point  of  view,  wait  until  scientists  cease  to 
contradict  one  another.  This  prudent  delay  is  all  the  more 
necessary  that  it  is  well  known  that  in  geology,  particularly, 
theories  change  with  a  rapidity  which  has  become  proverbial. 
Hypotheses  only  succeed  hypotheses.  And  yet  in  virtue  of 
each  one  of  them  it  is  claimed  that  the  Bible  errs!     The  Abb6 

*  Gerard,  Science  or  Romance;  J.  L.  Spalding,  lect.  2. 


72  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

Moigno,  in  his  second  volume  of  Splendeurs  de  la  Foi,  has 
inserted  five  large  pages  of  assertions,  all  alleged  to  be  scientific, 
giving  concisely  the  objection  and  answer,  the  yea  and  the 
nay  of  a  multitude  of  points. 

Third  Condition. — After  what  we  have  just  said  it  is 
useless  to  insist  upon  the  third  condition  required  to  make 
conflict  possible.  It  is  too  evident.  If  the  sense  of  the 
biblical  text  is  certain,  if  the  scientific  fact  is  incontestable, 
there  must  be  further,  to  prove  the  existence  of  any  contradic- 
tion, absolute  incompatibility  between  one  and  the  other. 
This,  as  we  have  already  said,  never  happens.  Now  to  prove 
it. 

I.  The  Bible  and  Geology.^ 

Thesis.  Geology  does  not  Contradict  the  Biblical  Account  of  the 
Origin  and  Formation  of  the  Universe  of  the  Earth. 

Geology  is  a  science  which  explains  the  primitive  forma- 
tion of  the  earth  and  the  successive  changes  which  it  has 
undergone  up  to  the  present  day.  It  describes  the  structure 
of  our  globe,  the  different  strata  and  mineral  veins  which 
form  its  crust,  in  a  word,  gives  the  anatomy  of  its  immense 
frame. 

Observation. — It  is  necessary  to  distinguish  carefully 
the  question  of  the  origin  of  the  world  from  that  of  its  forma- 
tion. The  first  is  concerned  only  with  the  moment  when  the 
universe  sprang  out  of  nothing,  the  act  by  which  it  passed 
from  non-existence  into  being;  the  second  relates  to  the 
primitive  transformations  or  evolutions  of  this  primary 
matter,  of  the  atomic  elements,  from  the  moment  when  the 
physical  and  chemical  causes  began  to  act. 

A.  Origin  of  the  Universe. — Relative  to  the  question  of 
origin  there  is  no  reason  to  fear  opposition  between  faith 
and  science.  And  yet  the  Scripture  speaks  in  the  most 
categoric  manner  on  the  subject.    ''In  the  beginning  God 

*Schanz,  I.;  Reusch;  MoUoy;  Vahey;  Vuibert;  Thein,  Anthrop. 
ch.  9,  Bible  and  Rat.,  p.  IV. 


HISTORIC   VALUE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  73 

created  heaven  and  earth."  It  is  God,  it  tells  us,  who 
created  all  things,  primary  matter  and  the  laws  which  govern 
its  successive  transformations.  But  true  science,  that  which 
keeps  within  its  proper  sphere,  relying,  as  it  should,  solely 
on  observation  and  experience,  declares,  as  we  have  just 
seen,  that  it  can  teach  us  nothing  in  regard  to  primary  causes, 
to  the  origin  of  the  world. 

B.  Primary  Formation  of  the  Universe. — Though  the 
question  of  the  origin  of  the  world  is  absolutely  beyond  the 
sphere  of  the  natural  sciences,  yet  that  of  the  primary  trans- 
formations which  it  has  undergone  rightly  belongs  to  them. 
Nor  is  there  any  fear  that  in  this,  their  legitimate  province, 
they  will  be  hampered  by  theology,  which  is  in  no  way  con- 
cerned with  the  question.  Moses  in  fact  presents  no  cosmog- 
ony, properly  speaking;  he  gives  no  theory  as  to  the  forma- 
tion of  the  world.  But  whether  the  universe  was  created  in 
its  perfection  or  whether  it  gradually  developed  under  the 
action  of  forces  created  by  God;  whether  it  began  in  a  solid 
or  a  gaseous  state;  whether  it  underwent  great  cataclysms 
before  reaching  the  state  in  which  it  was  found  at  the  appear- 
ance of  man;  whether  it  possessed  in  this  primitive  period  a 
primary  creation  of  organized  beings,  the  necessity  of  a 
Creator  is  no  less  certain.  Primary  matter,  the  forces  which 
animate  it,  the  laws  which  govern  its  transformation,  evidently 
claim  a  powerful  and  intelligent  cause,  the  action  of  God. 
Faith  in  creation,  therefore,  is  safe  amid  all  these  theories, 
and  since  Scripture  is  silent  upon  the  other  points,  a  vast 
field  is  opened  to  the  investigations  of  science  where  it  can 
proceed  untrammelled. 

It  will  be  well  to  give  here  a  sketch  of  the  two  most  popular 
systems  explaining  the  primary  formation  of  the  earth. 

First  System. — The  theory  in  regard  to  the  formation 
of  the  imiverse  generally  received  among  scholars  is  that 
imagined,  it  is  said,  by  Kant,  adopted  by  Herschel,  and 
finally  clearly  formulated  by  Laplace.  Several  modern  dis- 
coveries have  added  a  new  degree  of  probability  to  this 


74  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

magnificent  hypothesis.  We  know  that  the  spectroscope, 
for  example,  made  it  possible  to  prove  that  the  chemical 
composition  of  all  the  heavenly  bodies  is  fundamentally  the 
same  as  that  of  our  globe.  This  system  considers  the  earth 
as  a  nebula  changed  from  the  state  of  gas  to  that  of  a  sohd, 
that  is,  as  a  gaseous  mass  of  enormous  volume,  which,  grad- 
ually condensing,  became  a  fluid  incandescent  mass.  Sub- 
stances in  a  state  of  gas  being  much  larger  in  volume  than 
when  in  a  solid  form,  our  planet  had,  at  first,  immense  dimen- 
sions.^ But,  cooling  continually  during  innumerable  cen- 
turies, the  planet,  at  first  vaporous,  reached  a  fluid  and 
incandescent  state,  diminished  in  volume,  and  assumed,  like 
all  bodies  in  rotation  about  an  axis,  a  spherical  form  flattened 
toward  the  poles.  The  cooling,  continuing,  produced  a 
solid  crust  which  gradually  thickened  until  it  reached  a 
depth  of  about  twelve  thousand  leagues,  which  is  the  depth 
attributed  to  the  earth's  crust  at  the  present  day.  Minerals 
were  formed  at  the  same  time  in  the  mass.  The  earth's 
radius  being  1584  leagues,  its  crust  can  be  only  a  sort  of 
bark ;  its  interior  is  still,  as  in  the  beginning,  in  a  state  of 
fusion. 

While  this  gradual  cooling  was  going  on,  materials  in  a 
state  of  ebullition,  striking  violently  against  the  thin  crust  of 
the  earth,  dislocated  it  in  various  parts,  swelled  it,  pierced 
through  it,  and  thus  produced  the  mountains.  At  other 
times,  in  filling  the  fissures  and  crevices  already  produced, 
they  formed  the  mineral  veins  which  we  are  now  exploring. 

At  the  same  time  there  reigned  about  the  earth  an  atmos- 
phere charged  with  vapors,  and  with  mineral  and  earthy 
materials,  constantly  kept  at  a  high  temperature  by  the 
heat  of  the  mass  in  fusion.  The  temperature  of  this  mass 
lowering  according  as  the  solidity  of  the  crust  increased, 
there  were  produced,  by  condensation,  immense  quantities 

^  What  is  here  said  of  our  globe  must  also  be  applied  to  the  sun 
and  to  our  whole  planetary  system,  which  was  originally  one  confused, 
gaseous  mass. 


HISTORIC   VALUE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  75 

of  water  which  fell  upon  the  surface  of  the  earth.  Mean- 
while the  heat  of  the  superficial  crust  reduced  them  anew 
to  the  state  of  vapors  falling  back  into  a  liquid  state.  The 
waters,  however,  coming  into  repeated  contact  with  the  sur- 
face of  the  earth,  decomposed  it  and  formed  insensibly 
materials  which  they  carried  to  the  valleys  and  deposited 
in  successive  strata.  Finally,  after  a  long  struggle  between 
the  liquid  and  the  solid  element,  the  waters  ended  by  localiz- 
ing and  formed  what  we  call  the  seas.  The  present  volcanic 
eruptions  appear  to  be  only  feeble  remnants  of  these  in- 
terior convulsions,  which  in  the  first  ages  must  have  been 
much  more  violent  and  more  general.  This  theory  gives 
heat,  as  we  see,  a  preponderating  influence  in  the  formation 
of  the  rocks. 

Second  System. — According  to  this  system,  a  sort  of 
watery  liquid  must  have  primitively  contained  in  solution  the 
elements  of  mineral  substances.  By  pressure  and  chemical 
combinations,  all  these  materials  passed  into  a  solid  state, 
settling  into  crystalline  forms  and  the  various  kinds  of 
rocks.  This  theory  also  contains  a  very  specious  explana- 
tion of  earthquakes,  thermal  waters,  volcanic  phenomena, 
and  other  mysteries  of  nature.  It  has  been  called  the  chem- 
ical theory  in  opposition  to  the  first,  which  is  called  the  phys- 
ical. Though  it  is  less  accredited  by  scholars  than  its  rival, 
it  does  not  lack  illustrious  defenders. 

These  two  scientific  systems  are  divided  into  several  others, 
and  there  are  scholars  who  combine  them  both.  What  are 
we  to  think  of  these  systems?  We  are  free,  as  we  have 
already  said,  to  adopt  whichever  seems  to  us  most  probable. 
Moses,  it  is  true,  says  that  there  was  a  time  when  what  is 
now  called  the  earth ''was  void  and  empty"  (in  the  Septua- 
ginf  unsightly  and  shapeless  "),  and  that ''  darkness  was  upon 
the  face  of  the  deep  '^;  but  this  fact  is  acknowledged,  without 
exception,  by  all  geologists.  They  are  agreed  as  to  an  azoic 
period  destitute  of  all  animate  substance. 

Remark  upon  the  Age  of  the  World. — We  do  not  speak 


76  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

here  of  the  age  of  man,  that  is,  of  the  period  which  has  elapsed 
since  mankind  appeared  upon  the  earth.  We  shall  take  up 
this  question  later  on.  The  age  of  the  world  is  the  period 
comprised  between  the  moment  when  God  began  to  create  be- 
ings out  of  nothing  and  the  present  moment.  It  is  composed 
consequently,  1st,  of  an  interval  which  may  have  existed 
between  the  first  moment  of  creation  and  the  work  of  the  six 
days,  properly  so  called;  2d,  of  the  time  which  this  work  itself 
lasted;  3d,  of  the  years  which  have  elapsed  since  that  period 
and  the  present  time.  We  see  at  once  that  it  is  impossible 
to  deduce  the  age  of  the  universe  from  the  sacred  text,  since 
between  the  first  creation  of  the  elements  of  matter  and  the 
organization  of  these  elements  there  may  have  elapsed  an 
absolutely  unknown  period  of  time.  The  question  seems 
more  insolvable  still  when  we  study  that  of  the  six  days,  or 
the  Hexahemeron. 

C.  The  Work  of  the  Six  Days,  or  the  Hexahemeron.* — 
After  speaking,  in  the  first  verse  of  Genesis,  of  the  general 
creation  of  primitive  matter,  and  specifying  the  chaotic  state 
of  the  earth  in  particular,  the  sacred  historian  relates  the 
ulterior  organization  of  the  earth,  destined  to  be  the  abode  of 
an  intelligent  and  free  creature.  He  divides  this  organiza- 
tion into  six  acts  or  periods  which  he  calls  days,  with  evening 
and  morning.  Here  is  a  summary  of  the  Mosaic  Hexaheme- 
ron :  The  first  day  God  caused  light  to  spring  from  the  bosom 
of  the  darkness  which  enveloped  the  earth.  The  second  day 
He  established  the  firmament  in  the  midst  of  the  waters  by 
separating  the  waters  above  from  the  waters  below  the  firma- 
ment, and  He  called  the  firmament  heaven.  The  third  day 
He  gathered  into  one  place  the  waters  under  the  firmament, 
which  He  called  seas,  and  caused  the  dry  land  to  appear, 
which  He  called  the  earth;  the  same  day  He  conmianded  the 
earth  to  bring  forth  the  green  herbs  which  bear  seed,  and 
fruit-trees  which  yield  fruit,  each  according  to  its  kind,  each 

'  C.  W.  xxiv.  490,  xl.  145,  xliv.  317,  351,  445;  D.  R.  III.  Ser. 
V.  311,  vi.  49;  M.  xli. 


HISTORIC   VALUE    OF   THE    BIBLE.  77 

having  seed  according  to  its  kind.  The  fourth  day  He  caused 
the  sun  to  shine  in  the  firmament,  to  rule  the  day;  and  the 
moon,  to  rule  the  night;  and  the  stars.  The  fifth  day  He  com- 
manded the  waters  to  bring  forth  creeping  creatures  having 
life,  and  fowl  that  fly  over  the  earth  under  the  firmament  of 
heaven.  The  sixth  day  He  commanded  the  earth  to  bring 
forth  the  living  creatures  in  its  kind,  cattle  and  creeping 
things,  and  beasts  of  the  earth  according  to  their  kinds.  Fi- 
nally, the  same  day  He  made  man  to  His  image  and  likeness, 
and  the  seventh  day  He  rested,  that  is.  He  ceased  to  create.^ 
If  we  confine  ourselves  simply  to  reading  the  beginning  of 
Genesis,  it  would  seem  as  though  Moses  had  clearly  indicated 
a  chronological  order  in  the  formation  of  our  globe  and  of  what 
it  contains.  Yet  how  variously  the  Fathers  and  theologians 
interpret  this  work  of  the  six  days!  While  a  great  number  of 
them  admit  the  successive  order  of  creation,  the  Alexandrian 
school,  particularly  Clement  and  Origen,  think  that  the  his- 
torian had  no  intention  whatever  of  estabhshing  this  succes- 
sion of  days  or  epochs.  They  believe,  on  the  contrary,  that 
God  created  everything  at  once;  only  Scripture,  they  say, 
in  order  to  accommodate  itself  to  human  intelligence,  dis- 
tinguishes and  states  separately  the  various  works  really 
accomplished  in  one  indivisible  instant.  Hence  they  find  in 
the  Mosaic  relation  no  chronologic-historic  exposition,  but 
simply  a  logical  interpretation  of  the  creative  activity.  St. 
Augustine  also  admits  that  everything  was  created  at  once. 
In  his  opinion  the  days  of  creation  are  only  the  various  logical 

^  Must  this  rest  of  the  seventh  day  or  the  cessation  of  the  creating 
act  be  considered  as  extending  universally  to  all  beings  or  only  to  our 
earth?  In  the  first  place,  this  repose  even  in  regard  to  our  earth  is 
not  absolute :  each  day  God  creates  a  great  number  of  souls  to  unite 
them  to  bodies.  And  there  is  no  reason  why  other  worlds  may  not 
spring  again  out  of  nothing  at  the  creating  word;  and  our  planet  even 
give  place  one  day  to  another  when  the  destiny  of  man  will  be  accom- 
plished. It  was  for  our  moral  and  religious  instruction  that  Moses 
wrote,  and  not  to  satisfy  our  curiosity  relative  to  points  foreign  to  the 
end  he  had  in  view. 


78  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

moments  of  knowledge  which  the  angels  had  of  the  works  of 
God.  As  to  St.  Thomas  Aquinas,  he  first  remarks  in  his 
general  principles  that  when  a  text  is  susceptible  of  two 
meanings,  both  conformable  to  CathoUc  doctrine,  we  should 
not  arbitrarily  exclude  one,  and  claim  that  the  other  is  the  only 
meaning  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Afterward  applying  this  rule  to 
the  present  question,  he  carefully  distinguishes  the  creation 
itself  from  the  order  of  the  works  of  creation.  Though  he 
proclaims  with  all  the  Fathers  that  the  creation  is  a  dogma  of 
faith,  yet  he  ranges  the  question  of  order  in  the  class  of  free 
opinions.  The  opinion  which  affirms  the  chronologic  order 
seems  to  him,  it  is  true,  more  simple  and,  at  first  sight,  more 
conformable  to  the  letter  of  the  text ;  yet  he  finds  the  explana- 
tion of  St.  Augustine  more  rational,  more  ingenious,  more  efji- 
cacious  in  defending  the  Holy  Scriptures  against  scoffers: 
and  he  adds  that  he  prefers  the  first. 

Such  authorities  give  us  great  freedom  in  interpreting  the 
work  of  the  six  days.  Nothing  obliges  us  to  seek  concord- 
ance between  the  inspired  text  and  scientific  discoveries. 
Hence  but  few  of  the  objections  raised  in  the  name  of 
profane  science  against  the  Hexahemeron  can  be  sus- 
tained.* 

Does  this  mean  that  the  partisans  of  the  chronologic-his- 
toric interpretation  are  wrong  when  they  endeavor  to  estab- 
lish a  positive  concordance  between  the  biblical  narrative  and 
the  results  acquired  by  science?  By  no  means.  They  also 
are  free  to  maintain  their  opinion,  which  has  numerous  and 
illustrious  supporters.  They  can  do  so  all  the  more  that  they 
believe  it  possible  to  show  that  the  narrative  of  the  creation 
is,  in  its  great  outlines,  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  discov- 
eries of  contemporaneous  science;  that  this  narrative  con- 
tains the  culminating  facts  of  cosmogony,  and,  what  is  more 
remarkable  still,  that  it  presents  them  in  the  very  order 
indicated  by  scholars. 

Here  is  how  a  learned  contemporary,  M.  Pfaff,  expresses 

^Zahm,  Bil)le,  Science,  etc.,  p.  I.  ch.  4;  Schanz,  I.,  ch.  15. 


HISTORIC   VALUE    OF   THE   BIBLE.  79 

himself  on  the  subject  of  this  concordance  in  his  Histoire  de 
la  creation : 

"  If  we  compare  scientific  data  with  the  bibhcal  history  of 
creation,  we  find  that  the  latter  agrees  with  these  data  as  far 
as  we  have  any  right  to  expect.  We  discover,  in  fact,  the 
same  reigns,  equally  distinct  in  themselves :  allowing  for  the 
historic  variations  which  they  may  have  undergone,  the 
chronological  sequence  of  their  appearance  is  exactly  given 
by  Moses.  The  primitive  chaos ;  the  earth  covered  first  by 
the  waters,  then  emerging  from  them;  the  formation  of  the 
inorganic  reign,  followed  by  the  vegetable  reign;  then  of  the 
animal  reign,  of  which  the  first  representatives  were  the  ani- 
mals hving  in  the  waters,  and  after  them  the  animals  of  the 
land;  man  appearing,  finally,  the  last  of  all:  this  is  indeed  the 
true  succession  of  creatures;  such,  in  fact,  are  the  various 
periods  of  the  history  of  creation,  periods  designated  under 
the  names  of  days." 

This  word  day  used  by  Moses,  in  the  first  verses  of  Genesis, 
claims  a  special  explanation  in  the  system  of  those  who  hold 
to  the  chronologic-historic  sense.  What  are  we  to  under- 
stand by  these  days  in  which  God  organized  primitive  matter 
and  drew  from  it  the  creatures  which  constitute  the  entire 
creation?  We  have  great  freedom  in  this  interpretation. 
In  fact : 

1st.  The  Hebrew  word  which  we  translate  day  is  used  in 
that  language,  as  in  our  own,  metaphorically,  in  the  sense  of 
time,  period;  the  Scripture  itself  in  several  places,  and  in 
the  very  chapter  of  which  we  are  speaking,  employs  this 
word  to  designate  periods,  and  not  days  properly  speaking. 
There  is  nothing  in  this  interpretation  surprising  to  us  who 
constantly  say,  in  the  day  of  adversity,  in  the  happy  days 
of  my  youth,  etc. 

2d.  The  Fathers  of  the  Church  and  theologians  give  various 
explanations  of  this  word,  as  well  as  of  the  terms  evening  and 
morning,  and  the  Church,  on  her  part,  has  defined  nothing 
ooncerning  them, 


80  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

3d.  St.  Augustine  even  causes  us  to  observe  that  the  first 
three  days  cannot  be  astronomical  days,  since  there  was 
neither  rising  nor  setting  of  sun :  it  is  only  on  the  fourth  day 
that  the  sun  and  moon  appear  and  rule  the  day  and  the 
night. 

It  is  evident  that  we  are  perfectly  justified  in  under- 
standing by  the  word  days  undetermined  periods  of  time  of 
greater  or  less  duration,  of  thousands  or  of  millions  of  years, 
but  finite,  having  a  beginning  and  an  end. 

''As  to  the  words  evening  and  morning  which  Moses  em- 
ploys, they  have,  even  in  Scripture, "  says  P.OUivier/'  a  double 
literal  sense  which  agrees  perfectly  with  the  system  of  day- 
periods.  They  signify,  first,  end  and  beginning,  or  accom- 
phshment  and  inception ;  and  thus  the  Mosaic  formula  means 
that  the  accomplishment  of  each  of  the  works  of  the  six  days, 
developed  gradually  from  its  inception,  marked  a  distinct 
period  of  geogony.  They  signify  afterward  confusion  and 
arrangement;  and  in  this  sense,  which  is  perhaps  the  more 
acceptable,  the  same  formula  may  be  translated  thus:  From 
the  first  state  of  confusion  and  of  its  arrangement  was  formed 
the  first  period,  .  .  .  the  second  period,  etc.  This  interpre- 
tation seems  to  find  support  in  the  omission  of  the  word  ereb, 
evening,  before  the  description  of  the  yom,  or  seventh  day, 
which  is  the  day  of  rest.  This  day  is  certainly  not  a  day  of 
twenty-four  hours :  it  is  a  period  which  still  endures  and  which 
was  not  begun  in  a  state  of  confusion." 

What  we  have  said  may  serve  to  solve  several  other  special 
difficulties.  It  will  be  well,  however,  to  continue  to  mention, 
in  going  over  the  sciences,  the  principal  objections  which  may 
be  alleged  against  the  Mosaic  narration,  and  to  demonstrate 
briefly  how  little  faith  has  to  fear  from  them. 

D.  The  Mosaic  Deluge.^ — Here  are  the  terms  in  which 
Moses  relates  this  great  event.  In  the  six  hundredth  year  of 
the  life  of  Noe,  in  the  second  month,  in  the  seventeenth 
day  of  the  month,  all  the  fountains  of  the  great  deep  were 

'  Cf .  also  M.  Ixii.  335  ff. ;  C.  W.  xl.  635,  xliv.  741,  xlix.  17. 


HISTORIC  VALUE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  81 

broken  up,  and  the  floodgates  of  heaven  were  opened:  and 
the  rain  fell  upon  the  earth  forty  days  and  forty  nights.  .  .  . 
And  the  waters  prevailed  beyond  measure  upon  the  earth: 
and  all  the  high  mountains  under  the  whole  heaven  were 
covered.  The  water  was  fifteen  cubits  higher  than  the 
mountains  which  it  covered.  And  all  flesh  was  destroyed 
that  moved  upon  the  earth,  both  of  fowl,  and  of  cattle,  and  of 
beasts,  and  of  all  creeping  things  that  creep  upon  the  earth : 
and  all  men,  and  all  things  wherein  there  is  the  breath  of 
hfe  on  the  earth,  died.  And  He  destroyed  all  the  substance 
that  was  upon  the  earth,  from  man  even  to  beast,  and  the 
creeping  things  and  fowls  of  the  air:  and  they  were  destroyed 
from  the  earth:  and  Noe  only  remained,  and  they  that  were 
with  him  in  the  ark.  And  the  waters  prevailed  upon  the 
earth  a  hundred  and  fifty  days.     (Gen.  ch.  vii.) 

Let  us  remark,  first,  that  geology,  in  its  present  state,  pre- 
sents no  proof  either  for  or  against  the  deluge.  This  is  not 
astonishing;  the  inundation,  being  only  a  passing  event,  left 
the  surface  of  the  earth  almost  intact:  the  vegetable  reign 
was  not  disturbed,  the  olive-tree  reappeared  in  all  its  freshness 
as  soon  as  the  waters  subsided,  and  the  animals  on  coming 
out  of  the  ark  foimd  their  usual  food.  The  deposits  called 
diluvium,  as  well  as  the  erratic  boulders  or  rocks  formerly  at^ 
tributed  to  the  Mosaic  deluge,  are  of  another  source. 

But  if  geology  is  silent,  history  speaks  clearly.  The  fact  of 
the  Mosaic  deluge  is  so  undeniable  that  to  doubt  it  is  to  reject 
all  historic  certainty. 

1st.  The  account  which  Moses  gives  of  this  great  catastrophe 
in  which  the  whole  human  race,  with  the  exception  of  Noe 
and  his  family,  perished,  is  clear,  accurate,  and  methodical. 
The  details  are  given  in  such  a  circumstantial,  united,  co- 
ordinate manner  as  to  form  a  sort  of  journal,  or  historic  rec- 
ord, properly  speaking.  Now  all  are  agreed,  and  we  have 
demonstrated,  that  Moses  (aside  from  being  inspired,  a  fact 
which  we  do  not  consider  in  all  this  part  of  our  labor)  is  a 
profoundly  learned  and  eminently  reliable  author;  there  is 


82  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

nothing  in  his  writings  to  justify  the  least  suspicion  of  levity 
or  fraud. 

2d.  His  account  of  the  deluge,  moreover,  was  admitted  with- 
out a  shadow  of  reluctance  by  the  Hebrews,  his  compatriots, 
who  would  undoubtedly  have  protested  if  this  marvellous 
event  had  not  been  recognized  as  incontestable.  A  great 
number  of  the  bibhcal  writers  who  followed  were  faithful 
echoes  of  Moses,  and  Jesus  Christ  Himself,  as  well  as  the 
apostles,  confirmed  his  testimony  in  formal  terms.  Profane 
historians,  those  of  the  Jewish  nation,  like  Josephus  and 
Philo,  as  well  as  those  of  other  nations,  are  no  less 
exphcit. 

3d.  We  find  the  same  unanimity  in  the  traditions  or  chron- 
icles of  all  the  white  races:  always  a  mass  of  water  in  which 
everything  is  swallowed  up,  a  single  couple  saved  by  taking 
refuge  in  a  ship,  a  mountain  upon  which  this  ship  rested,  a  bird 
sent  out  at  the  end  of  the  catastrophe,  and  even  a  rainbow. 
And,  what  is  no  less  striking,  all  or  nearly  all  these  traditions 
locate  this  event  about  the  same  period.  * 

4th.  Let  us  add  that  the  event  is  so  well  established  that 
even  unbeUevers,  like  Bailly,  Freret,  Boulanger,  are  forced 
to  yield  to  the  truth  of  conviction.  Hear  what  the  latter 
says :  ''  Let  us  take,  in  the  traditions  of  men,  a  fact  the 
truth  of  which  is  universally  recognized.  What  is  this 
fact?  I  know  of  no  event  whose  monuments  are  attested 
more  generally  than  the  monuments  which  have  been 
transmitted  to  us  by  that  famous  physical  revolution 
which,  it  is  said,  formerly  changed  the  face  of  our  globe, 
and  occasioned  a  renewal  of  human  society.  In  a  word, 
the  deluge  seems  to  me  the  real  epoch  in  the  history  of 
nations.  Not  only  is  the  tradition  which  transmits  it  the 
most  ancient,  but  it  is  also  clear  and  intelligent,  it 
presents  to  us  a  fact  which  can  be  justified  and  confirmed 
by  universal  suffrage,  since  the  tradition  of  it  is  found  in  all 
languages  and  in  all  countries  of  the  world."  "  Not  only  the 
*  Lord  Arundel,  Tradition,  ch.  10  £F. 


HISTORIC   VALUE    OF   THE    BIBLE.  83 

Aryan  and  the  Semitic  races,"  says  Renan,  ''  but  nearly  all 
peoples  head  their  annals  with  a  struggle  against  a  humid 
element,  represented  by  a  great  cataclysm."  The  fact  of  the 
deluge,  therefore,  is  incontestable.  Hence  none  of  the  objec- 
tions formulated  against  it  have  any  real  value.  Moreover, 
we  must  bear  in  mind  that  it  is  an  event  miraculous  in  its 
cause,  in  its  announcement,  and  in  its  agent :  it  was  God  who 
used  the  deluge  to  punish  a  guilty  human  race ;  it  was  He  who, 
a  hundred  years  in  advance,  uttered  His  prophetic  menaces; 
it  was  He  who  at  the  same  time  opened  the  abyss  of  the  earth 
and  the  floodgates  of  heaven.  Now  nothing  is  impossible  to 
the  Almighty.  Hence,  though  science  may  be  unable  to  an- 
swer the  questions  which  arise  concerning  the  manner  of  this 
great  catastrophe,  it  argues  nothing  against  the  reality  of  the 
catastrophe  itself. 

But  is  it  true  that  science  casts  no  light  upon  this  subject? 
Far  from  it.  First  it  is  necessary  to  remark  that  the  prin- 
cipal objections  raised  by  Carl  Vogt  and  other  scholars 
against  this  cataclysm  vanish  of  themselves  the  moment  we 
assmne  that  the  Mosaic  deluge  did  not  cover  all  the  habitahle 
earth.  Now  nothing  obhges  us  to  believe  that  the  entire 
globe  was  submerged  by  the  diluvian  waters.  It  is  true  that 
Moses,  to  mark  the  extent  of  the  disaster,  uses  at  one  time 
the  expression  "  all  the  earth,"  and  at  another  an  expression 
equivalent  to  it,  ''  under  the  whole  heaven,"  universa  terra, 
sub  universa  caelo;  but  these  expressions  do  not  imply  abso- 
lute universahty;  in  fact,  in  many  parts  of  the  Scriptures 
they  evidently  apply  to  only  a  part  of  the  earth.  Thus  a 
number  of  theologians,  following  the  opinion  already  pro- 
claimed at  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century  by  the  scientist 
Isaac  Vossius,  interpret  the  words  of  Moses  in  the  sense  of  a 
deluge  which  covered  only  all  the  then  inhabited  portion  of 
the  globe,  destroying  the  human  race,  with  the  exception  of 
eight  persons  shut  up  in  the  ark.  We  know,  moreover,  that 
not  all  the  countries  of  the  universe  were  inhabited  by  men. 
Moses,  adopting  the  current  language  of  his  time,  and  wishing 


84  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

to  be  understood  by  those  to  whom  he  spoke,  naturally 
meant  to  convey  by  the  expression  "  under  the  whole 
heaven  "  the  celestial  space  which  covered  the  countries  in- 
habited by  Noe  and  his  compatriots,  that  is,  a  part  of  Asia. 

This  explanation  of  the  sacred  text,  largely  accepted  by 
exegetists,  is  in  no  way  condemned  by  the  Church ;  never  has 
it  been  defined  a  dogma  of  faith  that  the  diluvian  waters  sub- 
merged even  the  uninhabited  parts  of  the  globe.  In  adopt- 
ing this  interpretation  we  destroy  the  very  foundation  of 
the  objections  current  relative  to  the  deluge.  '^  Discussions 
concerning  the  history  of  the  deluge,"  says  M.  Pfaff,  "are 
now  without  object  for  the  naturalist,  since  theologians  recog- 
nize that  we  may  receive  the  account  of  Genesis  as  signifying, 
not  that  all  the  mountains  on  the  globe  were  simultaneously 
inundated,  but  that  all  humanity  was  destroyed  by  a  power- 
ful volume  of  water.  This  is  granting  that  the  deluge  was  a 
partial  submersion  of  the  globe.  The  scientist  has  no  oppo- 
sition to  offer  to  the  fact  of  the  deluge  thus  explained:  it  is 
impossible  for  him  to  prove  that  a  partial  deluge,  the  existence 
of  which  is,  moreover,  affirmed  by  the  traditions  of  nearly 
all  nations,  may  not  have  taken  place  or  has  not  really  taken 
place." 

There  is  an  opinion  more  recent  still  according  to  which  the 
deluge  may  not  have  extended  universally  to  all  men.  This 
opinion  has  been  defended  and  attacked  in  various  learned 
pubhcations.  Let  us  content  ourselves  with  reporting  the 
judgment  of  a  competent  authority  Hke  the  Abbe  Vigouroux. 
"  We  reject, "  he  says,  "  this  interpretation  because  it  is  con- 
trary to  the  general  tradition  of  the  Church,  and  nothing 
demonstrates  that  this  tradition  is  an  erroneous  interpreta- 
tion of  the  sacred  text." 

Let  us  add  a  few  subsidiary  remarks. 

1st.  There  is  nothing  in  regard  to  the  construction  of  the  ark 
which  need  greatly  surprise  us.  Why  could  not  Noe,  who  was 
rich  enough  to  engage  a  sufficient  number  of  strong,  intelH- 
gent  workmen,  and  who  had  a  hundred  years  in  which  to 


HISTORIC   VALUE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  85 

accomplish  his  work,  execute  the  order  of  God  at  a  time  when 
the  arts  and  sciences  were  well  advanced,  when  they  built 
great  cities,  when  they  raised  those  monuments  of  Baalbak, 
the  ancient  Hehopohs  of  Syria,  the  great  ruins  of  which  still 
tax  the  imagination  of  modern  times?  We  refer  to  the  most 
ancient  part  of  these  ruins,  for  there  is  another  part  which 
does  not  go  farther  back  than  the  Antonines.  "  While  the 
great  stones  of  the  pyramids,"  says  Lamartine  in  his  Voyage 
en  Orient,  ^'do  not  exceed  18  feet  in  length,  the  hewn  blocks 
of  granite  of  Baalbak,  which  form  the  basis  of  the  temples, 
are  156  feet  long,  from  15  to  16  feet  wide,  and  of  unknown 
thickness;  and  these  enormous  masses  were  taken  from  dis- 
tant quarries,  then  hoisted  one  above  another  at  a  distaDce 
of  20  or  30  feet  above  the  ground.  Hence  it  is  beheved," 
adds  the  same  author,  "  that  these  gigantic  stones  were 
moved  either  b}^  men  whom  all  primitive  histories  call  giants, 
or  by  antediluvian  men."  Burckhard,  who  measured  a  few 
of  these  blocks,  found  the  largest  was  55.50  metres  in  length 
3.65  metres  in  width  and  of  equal  thickness. 

Let  us  conclude  that  it  was  not  more  difficult  to  construct 
the  ark  than  to  raise  the  stones  of  Baalbak :  according  to  this 
evidence  of  strength  and  intelhgence,  the  construction  of  the 
ark  must  have  been  mere  play. 

2d.  In  regard  to  the  capacity  of  the  ark,  it  has  been  proved 
by  estimates  made  repeatedly  by  M.  Le  Pelletier,  by  the 
learned  Abbe  Maupied,  by  Silberschlag,  the  skilful  architect 
of  Berhn,  and  by  the  French  Vice-Admiral  Thevenard,  that 
the  ark  could  contain  many  more  kinds  of  animals,  mammals, 
birds,  and  reptiles  than  exist  at  present,  as  well  as  the  food 
necessary  for  them. 

Tiele  has  calculated  that  the  capacity  of  the  ark  was 
3,600,000  cubic  feet,  and  that  thus  there  was,  reserving  nine 
tenths  for  provisions,  sufficient  space  to  lodge  very  conven- 
iently nearly  7000  kinds  of  animals,  at  the  rate  of  one  couple 
of  each  kind.  This  was  evidently  a  larger  number  of  species 
than  was  necessary,  for,  according  to  our  supposition  of  a 


86  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETIOS. 

partial  deluge,  Noe  did  not  need  to  take  more  than  a  rela- 
tively limited  number  of  animal  species. 

Men  competent  to  judge  have  also  shown  that  the  ark,  in  a 
nautical  point  of  view,  was  of  the  best  possible  proportions, 
so  much  so  that  it  may  be  regarded  as  a  veritable  master- 
piece. 

3d.  Other  objections  quite  as  untenable  have  been  raised  in 
the  name  of  ethnology  and  philology.  To  explain  how  the 
descendants  of  Noe  had  time  to  form  the  various  races  of 
which  we  shall  speak  later,  and  which  are  stated  to  have  ex- 
isted as  far  back  as  we  can  go,  and  to  explain  also  how  human 
language  can  be  as  varied  as  it  is  at  the  present  day,  we  need 
only  observe  that  the  date  of  the  deluge  is  unknown  to  us. 
We  shall  prove,  in  speaking  of  the  antiquity  of  peoples,  that 
for  the  first  ages  of  humanity  there  is,  properly  speaking,  no 
biblical  chronology,  and  that  we  do  not  know  at  what  period 
the  Mosaic  deluge  took  place.  We  can  maintain  that  this 
terrible  chastisement  was  inflicted  by  God  on  the  human  race 
at  a  time  much  nearer  that  of  Adam  than  is  generally  sup- 
posed. There  is  nothing  to  prevent  its  dating  as  far  back  as 
historic  and  archseologic  sciences  require.^ 

II.  The  Bible  and  Astronomy. 

We  shall  confine  ourselves  to  answering  a  few  objections 
formulated  in  the  name  of  astronomical  science;  they  are 
directed  specially  against  the  work  of  the  first  and  of  the 
fourth  day.^ 

First  Objection. — Why  are  heavenly  bodies,  incom- 
parably greater  than  the  earth,  represented  as  simple  acces- 
sories of  the  latter,  as  luminaries  in  its  service? 

Answer. — 1st.  We  have  only  to  remember  that  Moses 
was  not  writing  an  astronomy  and  had  no  need  to  treat  his 
work  from  the  point  of  view  of  modern  mechanism.     Writing 

^Thein,  The  Bible  and  Rat.,  p.  iv.  ch.  15;  Anthropol.,  ch.  16. 
^  Schanz,  L,  ch.  16. 


HISTORIC  VALUE   OF   THE    BIBLE.  87 

to  instruct  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth  in  their  religious 
duties,  he  speaks  of  the  heavens  according  as  they  appear  to 
our  senses  and  according  to  the  relative  influence  of  each  star 
upon  our  planet.  Do  not  all  writers,  with  the  exception  of 
those  whose  object  it  is  to  give  a  precise  exposition  of 
science,  speak,  even  at  the  present  day,  in  absolutely  similar 
terms?  It  is  unimportant  for  us  to  know  whether  Moses 
received  or  did  not  receive  from  God  precise  ideas  concern- 
ing the  sun  and  the  stars;  what  is  certain  is  that,  consider- 
ing his  object,  he  should  not  have  spoken  otherwise  than  he 
did. 

2d.  Our  planet,  moreover,  while  filling  a  very  modest  r61e 
in  the  astronomical  system,  has,  because  of  its  connection  wdth 
the  divine  plan  of  the  redemption,  a  much  more  striking  one 
in  the  religious  order.  If  it  pleased  God  to  choose  the  grain 
of  sand  which  we  call  the  earth  upon  which  to  place  the  king 
of  creation,  and  above  all  to  make  it  the  theatre  of  revelation 
and  of  the  Incarnation  of  the  Word,  why  should  not  Moses 
speak  of  the  earth  in  a  very  special  manner?  Jerusalem  was 
very  insignificant  in  comparison  with  the  illustrious  cities  of 
antiquity,  and  yet  Holy  Scripture  does  not  speak  of  the  latter, 
or  mentions  them  only  in  connection  with  the  history  of  Jeru- 
salem and  of  the  Jemsh  people.  Who  could  take  offence  at 
this? 

And  let  us  not  say  it  is  strange  that  God  should  specially 
choose  a  little  globe  like  ours  to  make  it  the  habitation  of 
man  and  the  theatre  of  the  Incarnation.  There  is  much  which 
could  be  said  in  reply  to  this,  but  we  shall  content  ourselves 
with  a  few  beautiful  reflections  from  a  conference  of  P. 
Olivier,  S.J.  ''The  grotto  of  Bethlehem,"  he  says,  ''was  a 
very  humble  and  obscure  place  for  the  birth  of  the  Redeemer 
of  the  world;  why  then  did  God  prefer  it  to  a  magnificent 
palace  in  some  illustrious  city?  Let  us  not  search  into  the 
secret  designs  of  God:  unless  God  Himself  reveal  them  to  us, 
our  search  will  be  vain.  We  may  ask  man  the  reason  of  his 
conduct,  but  with  God  we  ask  what  is  His  good  pleasure.     His 


88  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

will  is  the  reason  of  all  things,  for  it  is  ever  just  and  holy, 
blending  with  His  infinite  wisdom.  After  all,  immensity,  in 
His  sight,  is  no  more  than  a  grain  of  sand;  and  if  He  has 
chosen  the  grain  of  sand  which  we  call  the  earth  to  place 
upon  it  the  king  of  creation,  it  is  because  He  has  made  this 
earth  suitable  to  bear  Him.  Moreover,  even  though  God  in 
creating  the  worlds  had  no  other  object  than  to  offer  the  mind 
of  man  an  inexhaustible  subject  of  study,  and  to  the  heart  of 
man  a  touching  motive  of  gratitude  and  love,  who  would  dare 
to  declare  this  end  imworthy  of  Him  whose  power  has  no 
limits,  and  whose  magnificence  equals  His  power? 

''After  that,  each  one  is  free  to  prefer  that  there  exist  in 
other  worlds  free  and  intelligent  creatures,  composed  hke  man 
of  body  and  soul,  of  matter  and  spirit,  and  endowed  hke 
him,  by  the  goodness  of  their  author,  with  all  the  means  of 
existence  suitable  to  their  nature  and  their  end. 

''At  the  same  time  we  are  not  ill  pleased  to  see  in  man 
alone  the  final  cause  of  the  visible  creation,  and,  conse- 
quently, in  the  earth  which  bears  him  the  most  august  place 
and,  before  God,  the  true  centre  of  the  universe.  Has  not 
God  so  loved  man  as  to  give  him  His  only  Son  ?  And  what  are 
all  the  worlds  compared  to  this  divine  gift?  Has  He  not  even 
made  man  divine,  by  associating  his  poor  human  nature  with 
the  divine  nature  in  the  person  of  the  incarnate  Word,  and  is 
not  man,  thus  transfigured,  greater  than  all  the  worlds  that 
roll  in  space?  If  the  Christ,  first  announced  and  prefigured, 
afterward  appearing  on  the  earth,  and  finally  perpetuating 
Himself  there  m  His  work,  which  is  His  Church,  and  in  His 
sacrament  of  love,  which  is  the  Eucharist,  is  truly  the  centre 
of  the  history  of  humanity,  why  should  he  not  also  be  the 
centre  of  the  history  of  worlds?  And  if  this  conclusion  should 
not  seem  rash,  do  you  think  the  starry  firmament  a  dome  too 
great  and  too  magnificent  for  this  earth  destined  to  bear  the 
Man-God?  Certanily  it  is  very  beautiful  to  think  of  the 
heavens  as  peopled  by  beings  who  recognize  and  adore  the 
Creator;  is  it  less  so  to  see  in  them  satellites — may  astronomy 


HISTORIC   VALUE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  89 

pardon  us  the  term! — stationed,  like  the  Magi  at  Bethlehem, 
about  the  humble  dwelling  of  their  sovereign  Master,  bowing 
with  respect  before  this  earth  so  small  and  yet  so  great,  hon- 
ored by  His  presence  and  sanctified  by  His  divine  blood? 
Does  not  one  drop  of  the  blood  of  Jesus  weighed  in  the  balance 
of  truth  outweigh  all  the  worlds  ever  created ;  and  the  sacri- 
fice of  the  cross,  and  the  sacrifice  of  our  altars  which  renews 
and  perpetuates  it  throughout  the  world,  do  they  not  suffice, 
were  man  the  only  intelligent  creature  after  the  angels,  to 
justify  all  the  magnificence  of  the  universe?  "  * 

Remark. — 1st.  Apropos  of  this  objection,  it  is  well  to  ob- 
serve that  never  has  either  the  Holy  Scripture  or  the  Catholic 
Church  taught  that  the  earth  is  the  central  point  of  the 
material  world,  or  that  it  dwells  motionless  in  space,  while 
the  sun  and  the  stars  revolve  about  it  as  about  their  centre  of 
motion.  As  the  earth  was  believed  immovable  by  the  Greek 
and  Roman  world,  it  was  natural  that  this  opinion  should 
reappear  among  a  large  number  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Church. 
In  this,  as  in  many  other  things  outside  their  immediate 
province,  they  followed  the  ideas  universally  received;  but 
their  error  on  this  point  has  nothing  common  with  faith. 
Hence  it  did  not  prevent  Copernicus,  a  sincere  believer  and 
priest,  from  breaking  down  this  false  system.  In  any  case. 
Scripture  has  nothing  whatever  to  do  with  the  geocentric 
error.  It  is  content  to  affirm  that  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars 
serve  to  light  and  vivify  the  earth.  Who  can  deny  this  fact 
as  evident  as  the  day? 

2d.  Let  us  add  still  another  word  on  the  hypothesis  of  the 

^  According  to  M.  Faye,  the  earth  is  far  from  being  of  minimum 
importance  in  an  astronomical  point  of  view.  This  learned  scholar 
says  that,  of  the  myriads  of  stars  discovered  by  the  telescope,  not 
one  is  inhabited,  and  the  reason  that  he  gives  for  this,  is  that  they  are 
all  in  full  incandescence;  and  he  adds  that  none  of  them  ever  will 
be  inhabited,  because  at  the  period  of  their  extinction,  when  a  living 
being  could  set  foot  on  their  cooled  and  solidified  crust,  there  would  be, 
owing  to  their  immense  distance  one  from  another,  no  neighboring 
sun  to  impart  to  them  light  and  heat. 


90  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

plurality  of  inhabited  worlds.^  This  hypothesis  has  been 
sustained  with  talent  by  several  Catholic  writers,  particularly 
by  Father  Secchi,  S.  J. ;  but  though  there  is  nothing  condem- 
natory in  their  opinion,  it  affords,  according  to  our  mind,  no 
convincing  proof.  It  is  in  no  way  repugnant  to  us  to  think 
that  these  innumerable  stars  which  people  the  universe  con- 
tain intelligent  creatures  capable  of  knowing  God;  we  have 
no  difficulty  in  admitting  that,  if  these  creatures  really  exist, 
they  had  no  need  of  redemption,  or  that  God  manifested  His 
mercy  to  them  in  a  manner  unkno^^^I  to  us,  or  that  they 
shared  in  the  effects  of  the  blood  of  infinite  price  shed  on 
Calvary.  But  we  do  not  see  why  man  may  not  be  the  final 
cause  of  all  the  visible  creation,  why  God,  to  whom  nothing 
is  impossible,  may  not  have  created  these  great  planets  in 
innumerable  multitudes  to  give  man  a  greater  idea  of  His 
almighty  power,  and  also  to  detach  him  more  easily  from  the 
contemptible  things  of  earth. 

Second  Objection. — How  was  the  earth  produced  before 
the  sun,  which  is  the  centre  of  its  orbit,  the  regulator  of  its 
movement,  the  principle  of  its  fecundity,  and,  perhaps,  its 
regenerating  focus? 

Answer. — This  objection  is  absolutely  without  founda- 
tion, for  it  does  not  necessarily  follow  from  the  words  of 
Genesis  that  the  earth  was  created  before  the  sun  and  stars. 
Commentators  admit  that  these  words:  ''God  created  heaven 
and  earth,''  imply  that  the  stars  were  created  at  the  same  time 
as  the  earth  in  its  chaotic  state;  but  that  various  causes — 
for  example,  the  heavy  vapors  which  primitively  enveloped 
the  earth — may  have  rendered  the  stars  invisible  to  it ;  it  would 
be  only  on  the  fourth  day,  in  the  fourth  period,  when  these 
vapors  disappeared,  that  the  sun  and  moon  would  have 
begun,  in  their  definite  and  complete  form,  to  shine  upon 
our  globe.  According  to  these  exegetists,  this  is  the  sense  in 
which  we  must  understand  the  words  of  Genesis  regarding 

^Schanz,  I.,  ch.  17;  C.  Q.  R.  ix.  193,  452;  C.  W.  xxxvii.  49, 
Iv.  860,  Ivi.  18. 


HiSTOmC  VALUE   OF  TfiE  BIBLE.  91 

the  fourth  day.  There  is  no  doubt  that  this  sense  is  suffi- 
ciently justified  by  the  estabUshment  of  visible  and  normal 
relations  between  these  stars  and  our  globe.  We  must 
observe,  however,  that  Moses  does  not  say,  God  then  created 
the  sun,  moon,  and  stars,  but,  God  made,  that  is,  caused  to 
appear.  Whatever  the  truth  of  this  explanation,  the  Church 
has  not  condenaned  it,  consequently  the  most  rigid  exegetists 
may  freely  use  it. 

Third  Objection. — Does  it  seem  probable  that  God  took 
five  days  to  organize  our  Httle  globe  when  He  needed  but  one 
to  create  all  the  w^orlds  of  sidereal  space? 

Answer. — Where  do  w^e  read  that  God  employed  but  one 
day  for  this  last  work?  Moses,  it  is  true,  tells  us  in  detail 
the  manner  in  which  God  prepared  the  earth,  the  cradle  of 
the  human  race ;  that  is,  he  tells  us  what  it  most  concerns  us 
to  know:  he  informs  us  at  what  moment  the  stars  became 
useful  luminaries  to  the  earth;  but  he  had  not  to  make 
known  to  us  how  these  stars  were  formed,  or  the  time  that 
this  formation  may  have  required.  Moreover,  this  fourth 
day  or  fourth  period  may,  hke  the  others,  include  milHons  of 
years.  Hence  astronomers  have  a  free  field  for  their 
hypotheses;  they  have  no  need  to  fear  contradiction  from 
Scripture,  which  is  silent  on  this  point. 

Fourth  Objection. — We  cannot  admit,  when  the  sun 
did  not  exist,  (a)  the  existence  of  hght;  (6)  of  vegetation. 

a.  We  can  hardly  understand  how  one  could  venture  to 
propose  such  an  objection.  If  it  had  any  real  value,  we 
should  have  to  conclude  that  it  is  impossible  ever  to  have 
light  at  night.  It  is  daily  evident  to  the  most  ignorant  that 
there  exist  sources  of  light  other  than  the  sun.  The  very 
light  of  the  lamp  by  which  Voltaire,  perhaps,  wrote  this 
ridiculous  objection  ought  to  have  shown  him  its  absurdity. 
Who  does  not  know  that  to  render  dark  bodies  luminous  noth- 
ing more  is  required  than  a  high  temperature  or  an  intense 
and  rapid  chemical  combination?  Will  not  electricity  send 
forth  brilUant  sparks  of  light  in  the  midst  of  int'erse  darkTies'B? 


92  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

Certainly  the  combination  of  cosmic  elements  at  the  beginning 
of  the  world  had  sufficient  power  to  produce  a  Hght  in  no  way 
inferior  to  that  of  the  sun.  Let  us  observe  that  the  mass  of 
matter  which  we  now  call  the  sun  has  passed  through  two 
different  states :  it  existed  first  in  a  nebulous  state,  endowed 
with  a  certain  power  of  giving  light,  like  other  nebulae  still 
observed  by  astronomers;  later,  under  the  influence  of 
numerous  attractions,  its  constitution  underwent  an  intimate 
change,  and  became  that  of  the  planet  which  we  to-day  behold. 
In  both  of  these  states  this  mass  may  have  been  the  hght  of 
day  to  our  globe;  thus  it  is  manifestly  evident  that  Hght 
could  have  reached  us  before  the  sun  had  its  definite  form. 

h.  We  are  still  less  embarrassed  by  the  objection  concerning 
the  existence  of  vegetation  before  the  appearance  of  the  sun 
under  its  present  form,  for  this  existence  is  completely 
established  by  geology.  Hear  the  testimony  of  Hugh  Miller 
on  this  subject:  ''At  no  other  period  [the  coal  period,  before 
the  influence  of  the  sun,  at  least  under  the  form  which  we 
now  see]  was  there  so  magnificent  a  flora.  For  example, 
there  were  2500  kinds  of  ferns  (there  are  now  only  sixty  in 
Europe),  and  they  were  of  gigantic  size.  The  trunk  of  the 
Calamus,  a  kind  of  reed,  grew,  probably  in  a  few  months,  to 
30  feet  in  diameter."  This  is  the  fact;  we  are  not  called 
upon  to  explain  it.  Let  us  remark,  however,  that  electric 
light  possesses  all  the  qualities  necessary  for  the  accomplish- 
ment of  phenomena  essential  to  vegetation.  It  is  the  same 
with  all  kinds  of  light,  natural  and  artificial.  It  is  well  known 
that  the  same  gigantic  vegetation  has  been  found  at  the  poles 
and  at  the  equator:  a  high  temperature  united  with  uniforai 
and  constant  humidity  prevailed  then  over  the  whole  earth.  To 
explain  this  primitive  condition  we  may  have  recourse  to  the 
scientific  hypothesis  we  have  mentioned.  The  sun  under  its 
nebulous  form  could  send  its  light  and  diffuse  its  heat  to  the 
earth  through  the  thick  vaporous  covering  which  enveloped  it.^ 

^  We  shall  examine  the  question  of  Galileo  in  the  second  part  of 
this  course,  Ch.  IV. 


HISTORIC  VALUE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  93 

III.  The  Bible  and  Biology.* 

We  have  just  seen  that  faith  has  nothing  to  fear  from 
geology,  or  the  science  of  the  earth,  nor  from  astronomy,  or 
the  science  of  the  heavens.  Let  us  prove  that  it  is  still 
more  secure  on  the  side  of  biology,  or  the  science  of  Hfe. 

According  to  Scripture,  God,  by  an  act  of  His  almighty 
power,  created  different  kinds  of  plants  and  animals  and  gave 
them  the  faculty  of  reproduction.  Impious  naturalists 
attack  this  teaching  in  the  name  of  what  they  call  spontaneous 
generation.  Spontaneous  generation,  according  to  them, 
consists  in  the  formation  of  certain  hving  creatures  not 
only  from  preexisting  germs,  but  solely  from  the  influence 
of  chemical  and  physical  forces  inherent  in  matter.  Thus, 
according  to  their  theory,  a  hving  being,  whether  plant  or 
animal,  can  be  brought  into  hfe  without  preexisting  germs 
furnished  by  antecedent  hfe,  by  the  simple  effect  of  physico- 
chemical  reaction,  ^'hke  sugar  or  vitriol."  And  they  argue 
that  if  this  can  be  done  now,  it  could  always  be  done,  and  that 
the  hypothesis  of  creation  from  hving  organisms  is  at  least 
superfluous.  Such  is  the  objection  presented  by  the  heter- 
ogenist  materiahsts. 

Answer. — Not  only  is  the  alleged  fact  of  purely  spon- 
taneous generation,  that  is,  without  preexisting  germs, 
unproved,  but  it  is  a  hypothesis  that  is  no  longer  even  tenable, 
and  it  is  rejected  by  the  most  competent  authorities.  ''  No 
one  since  Redi,"  says  M.  Flourens,  ''beheves  any  longer  in 
the  spontaneous  generation  of  insects;  that  of  intestinal 
worms  finds  no  defenders  since  Balbiani,  and  since  the  experi- 
ments of  Pasteur,  it  has  been  generally  abandoned  in  regard 
to  every  kind  of  animalculse."  "We  consider  the  doctrine 
of  spontaneous  generation  definitely  condemned,"  says  M. 
Quatrefages.    "  Not  a  single  positive  fact,"  says  Virchow,  ''  is 

'  SeeMivart;  Beale;  Th.  Hughes,  S.J. ;  O'Neill;  Quatrefages;  Gerard; 
Thein,  The  Bible,  etc.,  p.  IV.;  D.  R.,  III.  Ser.  xiii.  332;  A.  C.  Q.  xix. 
673,  vi.  193,  542,  xvii.  449;  C.  W.  xliv.  654;  Br.  W.  ix.  365,485,  495, 
xix.  673. 


94 


CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 


known  to  prove  that  there  has  ever  been  such  a  thing  as 
spontaneous  generation,  or  that  inorganic  matter  has  ever 
been  spontaneously  transformed  into  an  organic  being."  No 
one,  not  even  Darwin,  despite  his  theories  of  transformation, 
accepts  it;  Littre  himself,  even  before  his  conversion,  though 
the  hypothesis  accorded  then  so  well  with  his  atheism, 
rejected  it.  But  it  is  particularly  important  to  hear  the 
opinion  of  the  best  authority  in  the  matter.  Here  is  how 
M.  Pasteur,  one  of  the  glories  of  the  Academy  of  Sciences  of 
Paris,  terminated  a  lesson  given  at  the  Sorbonne,  in  the 
presence  of  the  most  eminent  scientists:  ''There  has  never 
been  a  single  known  instance  of  beings  coming  into  the 
world  without  parents.  Those  who  affirm  the  contrary  are 
victims  of  illusions  or  of  causes  which  they  could  not  appre- 
ciate or  which  they  did  not  remove."  ^  On  another  occasion 
he  said:  "I  am  convinced  that,  in  the  present  state  of 
science,  spontaneous  generation  is  a  chimera.  It  is  impos- 
sible to  contradict  me,  for  my  experiments  are  all  unrefuted, 
and  all  prove  my  assertion."  After  his  memorable  works, 
confirmed  by  the  experiments  of  Schultze,  Schwann,  Milne- 
Edwards,  and  the  obsen^ations  of  Payen,  Quatrefages,  and 
Dumas,  the  Academy  of  Sciences  announced  this  fundamental 
law  of  biological  science:  ''All  organized  beings,  in  the 
actual  state  of  our  globe,  receive  life  from  bodies  already 
Hving;  large  and  small  are  born  of  ancestry." 

^  Air  apparently  the  most  pure  contains  an  infinite  amount  of 
vegetable  and  animal  germs  which  easily  pass  through  any  filter  or 
by  any  stopple.  These  germs,  when  placed  in  the  proper  medium, 
begin  to  develop  and  then  cause  the  fermentation  or  decomposition 
of  diverse  substances.  By  shutting  off,  under  the  most  minute  pre- 
cautions, all  contact  with  such  germs,  Dr.  Pasteur  has  been  able 
to  establish  the  fact  that  life  never  appears  spontaneously  in  organic 
matter;  that  the  most  changeable  liquids  may  be  preserved  intact 
for  an  indefinite  time,  provided  that  the  ferments  supplied  by  the 
air  are  kept  out.  It  is  well  known  that  these  discoveries  of  Pasteur 
have  enabled  modern  surgery  to  make  such  wonderful  progress  by 
means  of  antiseptic  treatment  that  it  can  confidently  undertake  sur- 
gical operations  which  untU  recently  were  cowsidered  impossible. 


HISTORIC   VALUE    OF   THE   BIBLE.  95 

Remarks.— 1st.  The  hypothesis  of  spontaneous  generation, 
even  if  proved  true,  would  not  accomplish  the  end  desired  by 
a  certain  number  of  its  partisans.  With  it  they  would  dis- 
prove the  fact  of  creation  and  thereby  the  existence  of  God. 
But  were  we  to  admit  that  now  and  at  the  beginning  of  the 
world  hfe  sprang  of  itself  from  matter,  there  would  still  re- 
main to  be  explained  the  first  appearance  of  this  matter  and 
the  properties  we  assign  to  it.  It  must  have  existed,  it 
has  not  the  power  to  produce  itself;  hence  it  must  owe  its 
existence  to  a  being  anterior  and  superior  to  it.  We  always 
have  to  return,  whether  we  will  or  not,  to  a  creating  act,  to 
the  intervention  of  the  divine  almighty  power. 

2d.  Science  demonstrates,  moreover,  that  hfe  has  not  always 
existed  upon  the  earth :  that  it  had  a  beginning.  It  is  equally 
certain  that,  up  to  the  present  day,  no  living  creature  was 
ever  found  that  did  not  spring  from  another  being  endowed 
with  life.  This  fact  and  this  law,  the  existence  of  which  is 
absolutely  established,  is  a  singular  embarrassment  to  ma- 
terialists: to  sustain  their  absurd  system  of  the  eternity  of 
matter  they  must  not  only  repudiate  a  metaphysical  proof 
accepted  as  irrefutable  by  the  best  authorities,  but  they  must 
set  aside  the  conclusions  of  science  itself,  that  is,  the  testimony 
of  observation  and  experiment.  This  is  hard  for  men  who 
affect  to  accept  only  such  means  of  certainty  and  to  place 
faith  in  nothing  but  science. 

3d.  Another  remarkable  thing  is  that  the  more  science 
progresses,  the  nearer  it  approaches  the  Christian  dogma. 
Virchow  himself,  to  whom  virtue  and  vice  appeared  only  as 
chemical  products  like  sugar  and  vitriol,  and  thought  was 
nothing  but  a  secretion  of  the  brain,  has  at  last  been  forced 
to  write  these  significant  words:  ^'To  attribute  the  produc- 
tion of  life  and  of  mind  to  a  simple  evolution  of  the  organic 
world  is  to  admit  a  pure  hypothesis  and  to  leave  the  grounds 
of  science."  He  goes  further  still:  ''Inasmuch  as  the  action 
of  matter  can  no  longer  be  considered  as  the  last  cause  of  the 
production  of  beings,  ample  room  is  left  for  a  higher  causality 


96  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

which  we  have  not  the  right  to  declare  impossible.  The 
question  of  theism  stands  out  in  all  its  greatness  and  power 
before  us."  Haeckel,  one  of  the  high-priests  of  the  material- 
istic and  godless  science,  has  not  the  courage  frankly  to 
acknowledge  the  triumph  of  truth.  Yet  he  confesses  that 
''if  we  reject  spontaneous  generation,  we  must  admit  mir- 
acles." 

4th.  Scientists  have  not  only  proved  that  there  was  a  time 
when  no  living  being  existed  on  earth,  but  they  also  tell  us 
now  that  the  day  will  come  when  all  hfe  shall  disappear  from 
our  globe.  Some  venture  even  to  indicate  approximately  the 
epoch  of  this  extinction.  It  is  a  well-established  fact  that 
some  of  the  stars  which  people  the  heavens  are  gradually 
losing  their  hght  and  heat;  that  even  our  sun  has  considerably 
cooled,  and  that  the  time  will  come  when  it  will  no  longer 
send  enough  heat  upon  this  earth  to  sustain  life.  But  this 
cooling  process  is  not  the  only  cause  that,  sooner  or  later,  is 
to  bring  about  the  cessation  of  life  here  below.  Scientific 
research  has  led  to  the  discovery  of  several  other  causes  of 
inevitable  ruin.  In  discussing  these  causes  scientists,  very 
properly,  simply  move  within  the  sphere  assigned  to  them ; 
they  foresee  and  foretell  what  may  or  must  happen  accord- 
ing to  the  data  of  science.  As  Christians  we  know  that,  if 
the  words  of  revelation  are  taken  in  their  literal  sense,  our 
globe  will  be  destroyed  by  fire. 

We  see,  then,  that  in  regard  to  the  question  of  the  end  of  the 
world,  there  is  also  no  antagonism  between  the  teaching  of 
faith  and  that  of  science.  Rather,  science  has  demonstrated 
with  equal  clearness  that,  however  constant  the  sum  of  the 
energies  of  the  universe,  the  quantity  of  vibratory  energy  or 
heat  increases  unceasingly  with  the  loss  of  visible  energy; 
hence  it  follows  that  the  whole  universe  tends  to  a  Hmited 
state  or  existence:  it  must  die.  ''We  find,"  says  Claudius, 
"a  natural  law  which  allows  us  to  infer  with  certainty  that 
in  this  universe  all  things  have  not  an  invariable  circular 
course;  but  that  well- determined  modifications  take  place 


HISTORIC   VALUE    OF   THE    BIBLE.  97 

which  will  bring  about  a  limit  to  existence. '^  From  this  the 
same  scientist  infers  that  the  world  must  have  had  a  begin- 
ning. "If  the  world,"  he  says  paradoxically,  "were  from 
eternity,  it  would  be  dead  to-day." 

IV.  The  Bible  and  Paleontology. 

1.  Order  of  Creation  of  Organisms. 

Paleontology  is  a  science  relating  to  animals  and  vegetables 
which  no  longer  exist,  but  of  which  the  ruins  or  fossil  remains 
are  found  in  the  depths  of  the  earth's  crust.  The  name  fossil 
is  given  to  those  organic  bodies,  or  recognizable  traces  of 
them,  which  are  found  in  the  interior  strata  of  the  globe. 
Such  fossils  are  found  from  granite  to  the  soil  of  the  quaternary 
period,  where  unmistakable  traces  of  man  appear.  Only 
the  general  lines  of  paleontology  are  yet  definitely  deter- 
mined. Its  numerous  discoveries  are  nothing  compared 
to  those  which  remain  to  be  made,  and  its  conclusions  con- 
tradict one  another  in  various  points.  If  the  strata  which 
we  have  mentioned  were  laid  regularly  one  upon  another 
like  the  leaves  of  a  book,  we  should  only  have  to  lift  them, 
just  as  we  turn  the  pages  of  a  book,  to  read  with  certainty 
the  relative  age  of  fossil  formation.  But  this  is  by  no  means 
the  case;  the  leaves  are  scattered,  mutilated,  or  misplaced 
like  the  contents  of  an  ill-paged  volume.  This  explains  the 
want  of  agreement  between  scholars  seeking  to  reconstruct 
this  book  of  nature.  The  discussions  wax  warmest  when 
there  is  question  of  determining  the  time  necessary  for  the 
formation  of  the  different  strata:  some  say  innumerable 
centuries;  others,  a  much  shorter  time;  othei'S  again  explain 
everything  by  certain  great  upheavals  of  nature.  We  have 
no  need  to  range  ourselves  with  any  side,  and  We  do  not 
pretend  to  make  paleontology,  particularly  as  it  is  known  at 
the  present  day,  a  confirmation  of  the  Bible.  "  The  twentieth 
century,"  says  Quinstet,  "will  probably  laugh  at  our  science, 
just  as  we  laugh  at  that  of  our  predecessors";  and  Lyell 


98  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

insists  that  the  second  half  of  this  century  does  little  but 
correct  the  scientific  opinions  of  the  first  half. 

Are  the  organic  remains  of  animals  and  plants  which  we 
discover  in  the  bosom  of  the  earth  buried  in  the  order  indi- 
cated by  the  biblical  account,  and  do  the  periods,  as  paleon- 
tology now  presents  them,  confirm  or  contradict  the  six 
periods  of  creation  rigidly  interpreted? 

Two  theories  sum  up  the  hypotheses  of  scientists  in  this 
matter;  for  it  is  useless  to  mention  to-day  the  absolutely 
untenable  notions  of  those  who  attribute  fossils  to  earth- 
quakes which  have  taken  place  since  the  fall  of  the  first  man. 
Now,  neither  of  these  theories  presents  anything  which 
could  embarrass  the  Cathohc  scientist.  We  must  always 
bear  in  mind,  moreover,  that  we  are  in  no  way  obHged  to  con- 
sider the  Mosaic  relation  of  the  creation  and  of  the  formation 
of  the  world  and  the  earth  as  a  chronologic-historic  account. 

First  Theory. — This  includes  the  systems  which,  with  a 
great  variety  of  shades  and  detail,  agree  in  referring  the  forma- 
tion of  all  fossils  to  the  intermediate  period  between  the  first 
creating  act  and  the  work  of  the  six  days.  Before  this  Gene- 
sitic  week  the  earth  was  covered,  the  theory  assumes,  with 
organic  beings,  and  this  animal  and  vegetable  world  was  de- 
stroyed by  certain  catastrophes  the  effects  of  which  are 
indicated  by  these  words  of  the  second  verse  of  Genesis: 
"The  earth  was  void  and  empty,  and  darkness  was  upon  the 
face  of  the  deep." 

This  hypothesis  cannot  contradict  the  sacred  text,  since 
it  is  absolutely  silent  upon  this  point.  Let  us  remark,  how- 
ever, that  the  theory  seems  to  us  to  have  but  Httle  foundation. 

Second  Theory. — This  places  the  phenomena  of  fossihza- 
tion  in  the  Genesitic  week  by  interpreting  the  days  as  unde- 
termined periods  of  time.  It  assumes  that  during  these 
periods  occurred  the  great  earthquakes  which  swallowed  up 
whole  generations  of  plants  and  animals. 

This  theory  also  is  far  from  contradicting  the  Mosaic 
account.     First,  it  does  not  prevent  us  from  regarding  the 


HISTORIC   VALUE    OF   THE    BIBLE.  99 

vegetables  and  animals  created  during  the  six  days  as  the 
ancestors  of  the  present  fauna  and  flora.  The  sacred  text  per- 
mits the  assumption  that,  during  these  earthquakes,  certain 
species  were  definitely  destroyed;  that  others  were  preserved; 
finally,  that  others,  after  their  destruction,  were  reproduced 
in  the  interval  of  the  six  periods.     This  suffices  for  our  end. 

It  might  be  asked  whether  the  organic  debris  of  animals 
and  vegetables  discovered  in  the  crust  of  the  earth  have 
been  buried  there  in  the  order  followed  by  the  biblical  narra- 
tive, and,  consequently,  whether  the  epochs  established 
at  the  present  day  by  paleontology  confirm  or  deny  the  six 
bibhcal  periods  of  creation.  In  answer  to  this  it  is  enough  to 
repeat  that  nothing  binds  us  to  see  a  chronologic-historic 
order  in  the  Mosaic  story  regarding  the  formation  of  the 
world  and  of  our  earth;  that  there  are,  however,  many 
Catholic  scientists  who  admit  that  order  of  succession  and 
point  out  a  surprising  conformity  between  the  Mosaic  report 
and  the  results  of  science. 

2.  The  Origin  of  Man.     Transformism} 

Man  was  created  after  the  plants,  fishes,  birds,  reptiles,  and 
all  the  mammalia;  he  is  the  last  and  the  highest  work  of 
creation,  and  he  owes  his  existence  to  an  immediate  and 
special  act  on  the  part  of  God.  Such  is  the  teaching  of  the 
Bible:  ''God  created  man  to  His  own  image."  The  doctrine 
of  the  Church  on  this  point  is  no  less  clear.  Hence  a  Christian 
cannot  consider  man  as  simply  evolved  from  a  monkey  or 
from  any  animal  whatever.  Contrary  to  this  doctrine, 
Darwin,  Carl  Vogt  with  others,  and  as  early  as  the  beginning 
of  this  century  Lamarck,  assigned  man  a  different  origin. 

^  See  references  on  page  93;  also  Gaynor,  New  Materialism ;  Burnet, 
Why,  etc.,  ch.  4,  5;  Rickaby  in  C.  T.  S.  i.;  articles  in  A.  C.  Q.  i. 
126,  ii.  598,  644,  viii.  193,  xvi.  280;  C.  W.  x.  252,  332,  656,  xxv. 
90,  xxvi.  490,  774,  xxxix.  194,  289;  M.  Ixxiv.  14,  203,  491,  xciv.  113, 
249;  D.  R.,  New  Ser.  xvii.  1,  III.  Ser.  xxi.  51,  xxiii.  33. 


100  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

According  to  them,  he  is  the  result  of  an  incalculable  series 
of  successive  transformations:  a  first  organism,  to  which 
they  give  the  name  of  monad  or  protoplasm,  etc.,  underwent 
progressive  development  during  innumerable  centuries,  and 
ended  by  producing  successively  all  kinds  of  plants  and 
animals,  terminating  finally  with  man.  This  theory,  which 
includes  man  himself  in  the  series  of  evolutions,  is  absolutely 
false  and  inadmissible. 

We  must  beware,  however,  of  confounding  special  systems, 
pursued  too  often  for  an  impious  and  materialistic  end,  with 
the  general  conception  of  transformism.  The  falseness  of 
preconceived  anti-religious  systems  does  not  necessarily 
involve  the  condemnation  of  the  transformist  theory  itself. 

The  transformist  theory  is  that  which  assumes  the  general 
transformation  of  species  by  the  forces  of  nature  only.  It  is 
well  known  to-day  that,  by  careful  culture  and  intelligent 
crossing,  plants  and  animals  are  easily  transformed  and 
improved,  and  new  varieties  and  races  obtained.  Nature 
itself,  aided  by  climate,  environment,  and  food,  continues 
to  produce  before  our  eyes  similar  transformations.  We 
naturally  ask  whether  this  nature,  more  powerful  than  man, 
and  no  doubt  more  efficacious  in  the  beginning  of  its  plastic 
forms,  when  the  influence  of  heredity  was  absent,  did  not 
formerly  produce  not  only  varieties  of  race,  but  new  and 
more  perfect  species.  If  this  be  the  case,  all  the  species  of 
plants  and  animals  known  at  the  present  day  may  have 
developed,  in  the  course  of  innumerable  ages,  from  a  small 
number  of  primordial  types,  or  even  from  one  initial  type. 
We  have  not  to  examine  this  question  scientifically.  Our 
duty  is  only  to  examine  whether  this  theory  of  transformism, 
which  assumes  that  more  perfect  living  beings  are  derived 
from  less  perfect  living  beings,  is  or  is  not  contrary  to  Catholic 
teaching. 

We  should  unhesitatingly  answer  No  if  it  were  a  question 
of  vegetables  and  animals,  to  the  exclusion  of  man.  The 
Bible  affirmS;  it  is  true;  that  God  created  all  the  animals, 


HISTORIC   VALUE    OF   THE    BIBLE.  101 

each  according  to  its  kind;  but  these  words  could  still  be 
verified  even  if  these  species  were  not  fixed  and  unchangeable. 
Let  us  remark,  however,  that  the  primordial  determination 
of  species  by  the  creating  act  seems  rather  to  indicate  a  law 
in  virtue  of  which  each  species  was  henceforth  to  be  fixed 
and  immutable. 

The  question  is  more  grave  and  complicated  in  regard  to 
man.  Man,  by  reason  of  his  soul,  is  so  distinct  from  all 
organisms  that  we  cannot  conceive  as  possible  a  natural 
transition  from  an  animal,  even  the  most  perfect  animal,  to 
the  human  nature.  Thus  the  Bible,  describing  the  origin  of 
man,  mentions  a  special  act  of  the  Creator  in  the  production 
of  his  body  as  well  as  his  soul.  But  does  the  sacred  text 
formally  indicate  the  manner  in  which  God  created  the  body 
of  Adam  out  of  dust?  Was  it  by  an  immediate  act  of  His 
almighty  power,  as  the  words  seem  to  indicate  (Gen.  ii.  7), 
or  was  it  through  the  medium  of  secondary  causes?  The 
philosophic  reflections  we  have  just  made  lead  us  to  accept 
the  biblical  account  in  its  most  natural  sense,  that  is,  in  the 
sense  of  an  immediate  act.  It  has  always  been  so  accepted 
by  the  Fathers  and  Catholic  interpreters,  and  so  far  the 
partisans  of  transformism  have  not  produced  a  single  argu- 
ment casting  any  real  doubt  upon  this  explanation.^ 

^  Moreover,  even  if  theology  permitted  us  to  include  in  the  theory 
of  transformism  the  body  destined  to  form  with  the  soul  a  human 
being,  the  production  of  this  spiritual  soul  being  absolutely  excepted, 
the  opinion  would  be  regarded  as  illogical  by  real  transformists ;  for, 
if  plants  and  brutes  are  evolved  one  from  another  according  to  their 
complete  nature,  the  law  of  evolution  requires  that  it  should  be  the 
same  with  man:  according  to  the  philosophic  teaching  received 
among  Catholics  there  is  but  one  soul  in  man,  the  spiritual  soul, 
which  is  the  substantial  form  of  the  body.  It  is  not  easy  to  evade  the 
force  of  this  objection.  Hence  genuine  transformists,  consistent  in 
the  application  of  their  system,  make  no  exception  in  regard  to  the 
human  soul,  and  thus  fall  into  the  fatal  abyss  of  materialism. 

This  is  where  the  real  danger  of  the  doctrine  of  transformism  lies; 
it  justifies  the  extreme  distrust  it  inspires  in  Catholics:  Finding  that 
the  evident  object  of  many  of  its  advocates  is  to  make  this  hypothesis 


102  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

Remark. — Those  who,  with  preconceived  bias,  try  to 
explain  the  origin  of  plants  and  animals  without  the  in- 
tervention of  God,  will  always  find  it  impossible  to  explain 
the  origin  of  the  elements  of  matter  and  of  the  forces 
with  which  it  is  endowed,  as  well  as  the  origin  of  life.  It 
is  of  no  avail  for  them  to  proclaim  the  eternity  of  matter ; 
they  must  assign  a  sufficient  reason  or  cause  of  its  existence ; 
they  must  say  how  life  came  from  lifeless  matter,  intelUgence 
from  non-intelligence,  the  simple  from  the  complex.  To 
these  questions  they  can  give  no  answer;  rather,  to  escape 
from  a  truth  which  hampers  them,  they  are  forced  to  admit 
absurdities.^ 

3.  The  Difference  between  Man  and  Animals. 

The  false  systems  of  transformists  who  endeavor  to  class 
us  with  the  monkey  naturally  lead  to  the  conclusion  that 
man  does  not  differ  essentially  from  an  animal.  This  in 
fact  is  the  last  word  of  materialism.  Is  it  not  sad  to  see 
intelligent  men  expend  so  much  mind  in  proving  that  they 
are  nothing  but  beasts?  Truly  these  words  of  Scripture  are 
verified:  ''Man  when  he  was  in  honor  did  not  understand; 
he  hath  been  compared  to  senseless  beasts,  and  is  become  like 
them." 

These  systems,  we  hasten  to  add,  are  far  from  attracting 
the  majority  of  true  scientists.  Nevertheless  it  may  not 
be  amiss  to  show  how  ill-founded  and  absurd  they  are.  It 
will  enable  us  at  least  to  help  unfortunate  minds  misled  by 
them. 

Let  us  first  take  note  of  the  declarations  made  by  a  goodly 
number  of  rationalistic  scientists.  In  proof  of  the  common 
parentage  of  man  and  the  monkey,  they  allege  certain 
human  skulls  of  great  age  which  belonged,  they  say,  to  an 

the  basis  of  a  system  of  atheistical  philosophy,  and  to  establish, 
under  cover  of  science,  the  fundamental  dogma  of  materialism,  they 
reject  the  hypothesis  itself  as  false  and  impious. 

*  A.  C.  Q.  xi.  58  (Animals  and  Plants) ;  Mivart,  Lessons,  etc. 


HISTORIC   VALUE    01"   THE    BlBLll  l03 

inferior  type  of  populations  called  anthropomorphic,  who 
hold  a  middle  place  between  the  hmnan  form  and  the  monkeys 
most  closely  resembling  man,  such  as  the  chimpanzee,  gibbon, 
gorilla,  orang-outang.  Unfortunately  for  those  who  aspire 
to  this  parentage,  scientists,  who  cannot,  moreover,  be  re- 
proached with  great  orthodoxy,  acknowledge  that  this 
argument  is  of  little  value.  Let  us  be  satisfied  to  quote 
Virchow.  ''If  we  study,"  says  he,  ''the  human  fossil  of  the 
quaternary  period,  which  is,  moreover,  the  nearest  approach 
to  our  most  remote  ancestors,  we  always  find  man  such  as  he 
is  at  the  present  day.  .  .  .  The  ancient  troglodytes,  the  in- 
habitants of  coal-pits  and  lake  dwellings,  present  the  ap- 
pearance of  a  perfectly  respectable  society  of  human  beings: 
they  have  heads  of  a  dimension  which  many  men  of  the 
present  day  might  think  themselves  fortunate  to  possess. 
In  short,  we  are  obliged  to  acknowledge  that  we  have  not  the 
smallest  fossil  type  indicating  an  inferior  state  of  human 
development.  What  is  more,  when  we  estimate  the  total 
number  of  human  fossils  known  at  the  present  day,  and 
compare  them  with  what  the  present  period  presents,  we 
can  boldly  affirm  that  a  much  larger  number  of  individuals 
of  relative  inferiority  is  found  among  living  men  than  among 
the  fossils  so  far  discovered.  .  .  .  There  has  not  yet  been 
found  a  single  fossil  skull  of  monkey  or  man-monkey  which 
could  have  belonged  to  a  human  being."  Huxley,  another 
rationahst,  speaks  no  less  clearly  or  categorically.  "The 
structural  differences  existing  between  man  and  the  monkey 
are  not,"  he  says,  "either  small  or  insignificant,  and  the 
human  fossils  so  far  discovered  indicate  no  approach  what- 
ever toward  the  pithecoid  form"  (that  is,  the  man-monkey). 
Zoologists  most  in  favor  of  our  simian  origin  acknowledge 
that  the  researches  of  paleontology  have  never  succeeded  in 
finding  the  slightest  trace  of  a  species  from  which  developed, 
on  the  one  hand,  man  and,  on  the  other,  the  anthropoid 
species,  which,  according  to  their  transformist  theories,  served 
as  common  ancestor  to  the  monkey  of  the  present  day  and  to 


104  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

US.  This  is  not  all:  as  the  transformations  according  to 
Darwinism  were  effected  only  by  imperceptible  transitions, 
by  the  fortuitous  acquisition  of  an  advantage  at  first  very 
slight,  it  follows  that  there  must  have  been  between  man  and 
the  monkey  most  closely  resembling  him  a  long  series  of 
intermediaries.  Now,  notwithstanding  the  most  diligent 
researches,  not  one  of  these  intermediary  fossils  has  ever  been 
found.  To  afhrm  gratuitously  that  they  are  to  be  found  in 
the  submerged  lands  is  to  leave  the  domain  of  science  for 
that  of  pure  hypothesis. 

Finally,  whatever  resemblance  may  be  established  as  ex- 
isting between  man  and  the  monkey,  it  does  not  authorize 
us  in  concluding  a  common  ancestor:  that  a  thing  is  pos- 
sible does  not  argue  its  existence.  Moreover,  we  shall 
demonstrate  that  there  are  great  and  radical  differences 
between  these  two  zoological  types,  and  we  shall  give  a  few 
direct  proofs  which  attest  the  nobility  and  excellence  of 
human  nature. 

Thesis. — Man  Differs  Essentially  from  Animals.^ 
First  Proof. — Anatomical  and  Physiological  Differ- 
ences BETWEEN  Man  and  the  Monkey.  Is  it  astonishing 
that  there  are  certain  osteologic  resemblances  (structure  of  the 
bones)  between  man  and  the  monkey?  Is  not  man  defined 
a  reasoning  animal?  Is  it  not  clear,  therefore,  that  there 
must  be  some  resemblance  between  him  and  an  unreasoning 
animal?  But  if  that  is  sufficient  to  make  us  monkeys,  we 
might  claim,  with  just  as  much  appearance  of  truth,  that 
we  are  perfected  lions  or  tigers,  for  the  anatomical  structure 
of  our  digestive  organs,  for  example,  is  exactly  like  that  of 
these  carnivorous  animals.  But  if  there  are  points  of  resem- 
blance between  man  and  animals,  there  are  notable  and  very 
characteristic  points  of  difference.  First,  man  walks  erect, 
the  monkey  is  a  quadruped  and  cHmbs;  the  gorilla  itself, 

*  Mivart,  Man  and  Ape;  Lessons,  ch.  6  ff.;  Maher,  p.  546  ff.;  Thein, 
AnthropoL,  ch.  4  ff. 


HISTORIC.   VALUE    OP   THE    BIBLE.  105 

which  is  cited  as  the  nearest  approach  to  man  among  existing 
monkeys,  can  preserve  a  vertical  attitude  only  for  a  very  short 
time ;  the  soles  of  the  feet,  the  hands,  the  vertical  attitude, 
the  development  and  conformation  of  the  brain,  the  laugh, 
the  organs  of  mastication,  etc.,  are  so  different  in  man  and  the 
monkey  most  closely  resembling  him  that  a  naturalist  must 
needs  be  inspired  with  hatred  of  his  own.  excellence  to  con- 
clude that  he  and  these  creatures  form  anatomically  the 
same  class.  The  single  circumstance  of  the  almost  complete 
absence  of  hair  on  the  body  of  man,  particularly  on  the  back, 
is  so  significant  that  Wallace  declares  that  it  creates  a  diffi- 
culty impossible  for  Darwinism  to  solve,  and  he  adds  that 
Darwin  and  Haeckel  are  much  annoyed  with  him  for  having 
had  the  imprudence  to  point  it  out.  There  is  nothing  more 
frivolous,  or  rather  more  ridiculous,  than  the  explanations 
they  attempt  to  give  of  this  partial  nakedness  of  the  human 
skin. 

Let  us  hear,  moreover,  what  serious  scientists  say,  and 
particularly  M.  de  Quatrefages,  whose  word  has  long  been 
an  authority  in  this  matter.  He  concludes  a  report  on  the 
progress  of  anthropology  with  the  following  words:  ''There 
exists  no  possible  passage  between  man  and  the  monkey, 
unless  we  introvert  the  laws  of  development ";  that  is,  unless 
materialists  overthrow  at  one  blow  the  system  which  the}^ 
have  elaborated  with  great  difficulty.  Carl  Vogt  himself, 
atheist  and  cynic  as  he  is,  is  most  scathing  in  his  raillery  of 
those  among  his  friends  who  rank  man  in  the  same  class  with 
animals. 

Second  Proof.  Intellectual,  Moral,  and  Religious 
Differences. — Though  the  physical  resemblance  between 
man  and  the  monkey  were  still  greater,  it  would  prove  ab- 
solutely nothing,  for  what  constitutes  man  and  his  real 
superiority  is  not  his  skeleton,  but  his  rational  and  free  soul, 
his  moral  and  religious  nature.  This  is  not  a  simple  differ- 
ence of  degree,  but  a  difference  of  nature,  of  essence.  Let  us 
develop  this  capital  truth. 


106  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

A.  Man  alone  has  intelligence,  for  he  alone  reasons;  he 
alone  speaks;  he  alone  invents  and  is  indefinitely  perfecti- 
ble.i 

a.  Man  Alone  Reasons.  —  Animals  are  endowed  with 
instinct,  that  is,  with  a  blind,  spontaneous  impulse  which 
is  not  the  result  of  reflection,  but  of  organization,  and  which 
is  consequently  irresistible,  uniform,  invariable.  The  ani- 
mal, impelled  by  this  interior  principle,  does  not  act  freely 
or  with  any  consciousness  of  itself.  It  perceives  only  the 
phenomena  which  impress  the  senses  (Potius  agitur  quam 
agit).  Man,  on  the  contrary,  endowed  with  intelligence, 
with  reason,  possesses  the  consciousness  of  himself  and 
the  reflected  consciousness  of  his  acts.  He  alone  is  capable 
of  forming  abstract,  universal,  absolute  ideas;  he  alone  is 
capable  of  generalizing  and  of  grasping  the  substantial  causes 
of  the  phenomena  which  strike  his  senses,  and  not  the 
phenomena  only;  he  alone  has  knowledge  of  purely  spiritual 
beings;  he  alone  comprehends  the  beautiful,  the  true,  the 
good ;  armed  \vith  the  laws  of  logic,  he  reasons,  he  learns,  he 
daily  acquires  new  knowledge.  Animals  are  wholly  devoid 
of  these  things.  It  is  true  that  with  persuasion  and  threats 
they  may  be  made  to  do  many  things ;  but  who  ever  thinks, 
for  exam.ple,  of  reasoning  even  with  the  cleverest  animal? 
Who  could  seriously  beheve  it  possessed  of  intelligence,  that 
is,  of  the  power  of  forming  abstract,  intellectual,  universal 
ideas  from  material  images  furnished  by  the  senses?  ^ 

h.  Man  Alone  Speaks. — We  hear  animals  emit  cries 
by  which  they  express  what  they  feel,  pleasure  or  pain ;  but 
they  have  no  language  properly  speaking,  for  they  cannot 
express  thoughts,  which  they  have  not.  The  animal  which 
manifests  its  impressions  does  not  do  so  freely  and  is  not  aware 
of  this  manifestation.  Their  cries  are  simply  an  intermediary 
of  which  they  are  unconscious,  and  the  cleverest  parrot  is  only 
a  sort  of  repeating  machine,  a  living  phonograph.    We  may 

^  Mivart,  Origin  of  Human  Reason;  A.  C.  Q.  ix. 
^Lacordaire,  5th  conf.  on  God. 


HISTORIC   VALUE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  107 

theorize  over  the  alleged  language  of  animals,  but  it  is  incon- 
testable that  only  man  speaks  with  the  expHcit  and  formal 
intention  of  communicating  his  thoughts;  besides,  when  he 
speaks,  when  he  converses,  when  he  teaches,  when  he  argues 
it  is  most  frequently  for  the  sole  purpose  of  expressing  his 
thoughts,  of  communicating  knowledge  to  his  interlocutor.^ 

c.  Only  Man  is  Perfectible,  and  He  Alone  Invents. — 
The  animal  never  goes  beyond  the  limits  of  his  instinct.  No 
doubt,  as  we  have  just  said,  by  making  use  of  the  senses,  of 
the  memory,  of  the  sensible  imagination  of  the  animal,  we  may 
succeed  in  correcting  in  him  certain  faults,  in  teaching  him 
certain  habits,  in  a  word,  by  utilizing  the  instincts  of  the 
animal  as  we  utilize  the  forces  of  nature;  but  we  can  say, 
nevertheless,  that  the  animal  at  birth  is  completely  formed, 
and  that  of  itself  it  is  unperfectible.  I^eft  to  its  instinct,  it 
would  always  remain  what  its  species  was  at  the  beginning 
of  the  world.  The  bees  build  their  hives  to-day  as  they  did 
in  the  time  of  Solomon,  and  the  habits  of  animals  are  still 
what  Aristotle  describes  them:  progress  supposes  reflection, 
reason,  general  ideas,  and  rational  abstraction. 

B.  Only  man  has  a  moral  sense,  sl  sense  of  duties  imposed 
upon  his  conscience.  He  not  only  distinguishes  between  vir- 
tue and  vice,  but  he  has  the  faculty  of  enjoying  the  good  he 
does  and  of  suffering  by  the  evil  he  commits ;  he  alone  also 
possesses  the  idea  of  future  life  bringing  to  him  the  merited 
reward  or  punishment.  No  doubt  we  see  animals  abstain 
from  certain  things,  but  it  is  only  through  instinct,  and 
through  fear  of  physical  chastisement  which  their  sensible 
memory  recalls;  it  certainly  is  not  to  avoid  a  moral  evil,  a 
remorse  of  conscience.  If  man  feels  the  responsibility  of  his 
actions,  if  he  is  capable  of  merit  or  demerit,  it  is  in  consequence 
of  his  liberty  or  the  faculty  of  choosing  between  means  which 
lead  to  an  end ;  now  this  faculty  also  belongs  only  to  man ; 

^A.  C.  Q.  xi.  226;  D.  R.,  N.  Ser.  xxx.  139;  Mivart,  on  Truth,  ch. 
16;  Lessons,  ch.  4;  Maher,  Psychol.,  p.  432  ff.,  552;  also  Lacor- 
daire's  beautiful  remarks  in  his  4th  conf.  on  God  and  Man. 


108  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

the  animal  has  only  instinct  which  does  not  permit  it  to 
deliberate  and  to  make  a  reasonable  choice:  Potius  agitur 
QUAM  AGiT.  Therefore,  it  is  not  responsible  for  its  acts;  if 
we  punish,  if  we  kill  an  injurious  animal,  it  is  not  because  we 
regard  it  as  guilty,  but  to  prevent  it  from  doing  further  harm 
by  following  the  same  instinct.  It  is  quite  otherwise  with 
man;  whatever  the  impressions  made  upon  him  by  sensible 
objects,  he  can  always  act  independently  of  his  feeling  of 
attraction  or  repulsion.  '^Man,"  says  Bossuet,  ''is  so  com- 
pletely master  of  his  body  that  he  can  even  sacrifice  it  to  a 
greater  good. "  ^ 

C.  Man  alone  has  a  religious  sense.  Religion,  that  tendency 
which  impels  us  to  seek  God,  to  aspire  to  Him,  which  makes 
us  feel  our  need  to  place  ourselves  in  union  with  Him,  is  so 
exclusively  possessed  by  man  that  pagans  long  since  proposed 
to  define  man  a  religious  animal. 

This  is  the  teaching  of  philosophy  and  plain  common 
sense,  confirmed  by  the  testimony  of  the  most  eminent 
scholars.  '^  Man  alone,"  says  M.  Quatrefages,  "  possesses  the 
idea  of  good  and  of  moral  evil,  independently  of  all  welfare 
or  of  all  physical  suffering;  he  believes  in  superior  beings 
capable  of  influencing  his  destiny;  he  beUeves  in  the  pro- 
longation of  his  existence  after  this  life.  .  .  .  Never  in  any 
animal  whatever  has  anything  similar  or  even  analogous 
been  found." 

As  to  the  alleged  existence  of  peoples  without  religion,  let 
us  be  satisfied  to  refute  it  by  quoting  a  few  eminent  authori- 
ties. ''I  declare,"  says  the  same  scholar,  ''that  I  do  not 
know  of  a  single  people  that  can,  with  any  appearance  of 
truth,  be  called  atheists."  He  also  says  elsewhere:  " Obliged 
by  my  teaching  itself  to  examine  all  the  human  races,  I 
have  searched  for  atheism  in  the  lowest  as  well  as  in  the 
most  civilized  peoples;  I  have  never  found  it  except  individ- 
ually, or  in  more  or  less  restricted  schools  such  as  were  seen 
in  Europe  in  the  last  century,  and  are  still  to  be  seen  at  the 

^  Lacordaire,  6th  conf.  on  God. 


HISTORIC   VALUE   OF   THE    BIBLE.  109 

present  day.  .  .  .  Nowhere  has  atheism  anything  but  an 
erratic  existence.  .  .  .  This  is  the  result  of  a  search  which  I 
may  be  permitted  to  call  conscientious.  .  .  .  ''  The  cele- 
brated Livingston  also  says:  ''However  degraded  the  African 
people,  they  have  no  need  to  be  taught  the  existence  of  God 
or  to  be  told  of  a  future  hfe :  these  two  truths  are  universally 
recognized  in  Africa.'' 

Conclusion. — From  the  foregoing  we  may  rightly  con- 
clude that,  aside  from  the  very  marked  differences  between 
the  organisms  of  man  and  beast,  there  is,  from  an  intellectual, 
moral,  and  religious  point  of  view,  an  impassable  gulf  between 
them.  This  threefold  difference  is  less  striking,  perhaps, 
than  the  organic  differences,  as  it  does  not  fall  under  the 
senses  and  cannot  be  touched  with  the  scalpel.  But  in  real- 
ity it  is  far  greater  than  that  which  separates  the  animal 
from  the  vegetable  kingdom. 

In  concluding  our  remarks  on  this  question  we  should  like 
to  quote,  with  a  few  modifications,  a  page  from  the  Abbe 
Caussette:  ''How  did  it  ever  enter  the  mind  of  a  rational 
man  to  place  himself  on  a  level  with  the  ape?  What  progress 
has  the  ape  achieved  during  the  ages  that  he  has  been  gam- 
bolling in  the  forests?  We  behold  man,  on  the  contrary, 
moving  proudly  through  the  treasures  of  his  mind  which  fill 
the  libraries  and  museums  of  Rome,  of  Paris,  of  Munich,  of 
London,  or  amid  the  marvels  of  a  world's  exposition,  the 
fruit  of  his  intelligence  and  skill.  '  Behold,'  he  exclaims,  '  I 
am  the  author  of  the  immortal  Iliad  of  Homer,  of  the 
Summa  Theologica  of  St.  Thomas;  I  bear  the  name  of 
Plato,  of  Augustine,  of  Bossuet ;  I  have  composed  the  glo- 
rious strains  of  a  Rossini,  of  a  Gluck ;  I  have  thrilled  the  old 
world  and  the  new  with  the  accents  of  a  Pindar,  a  Euripi- 
des, a  Racine,  a  Comeille;  I  built  the  Parthenon,  I  flung 
into  the  clouds  the  lordly  dome  of  St.  Peter's;  I  have 
weighed  the  stars,  analyzed  their  elements,  and  followed  the 
path  of  suns  in  the  depths  of  the  heavens  ;  I  have  dis- 
covered unknown  continents  and  ruled  the  vast  seas;  I  have 


110  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

brought  to  light  and  learned  the  nature  of  a  whole  world  of 
animalcules,  and  I  have  added  a  decade  to  the  life  of  my 
fellow  men ;  bending  the  forces  of  nature  to  my  will,  I  speak 
with  the  rapidity  of  lightning  to  my  brothers  at  the  extreme 
ends  of  the  earth;  I  have  made  steam  my  chariot;  my  work 
is  the  civilization  of  Babylon,  Athens,  Rome,  and  Christian 
Europe.  Show  me  the  cities  built,  the  books  produced,  the 
masterpieces  achieved,  the  discoveries  accomplished  by  the 
ape  from  whom,  you  dare  to  affirm,  I  am  descended,  and  I 
may  think  that  you  speak  seriously.'  " 

4.  The  Unity  of  the  Human  Species  and  its  Descent  from  Adam} 

''God,"  says  St.  Paul  (Acts  xvii.  26),  "hath  made  of  one, 
all  mankind,  to  dwell  upon  the  whole  face  of  the  earth."  It 
is  an  article  of  faith  that  all  men  who  now  people  the  earth 
are  descended  from  Adam;  this  dogma,  is  moreover,  iati- 
mately  connected  with  that  of  original  sin,  of  redemption,  etc. 
It  is  rejected,  nevertheless,  by  the  polygenists,  who  contend 
that  there  are  several  different  species  among  men.  The 
monogenists,  on  the  contrary,  acknowledge  that  all  men 
form  but  one  species,  though  in  this  species  there  are  several 
different  races. 

Before  proving  that  Scripture  is  in  no  way  at  variance  with 
true  science,  let  us  make  a  few  prehminary  observations. 

First  Observation. — The  Bible  does  not  clearly  affirm 
the  specific  unity  of  mankind,  but  only  the  imity  of  origin, 
that  is,  the  Adamic  unity  of  all  the  human  races.  It  follows 
that  the  Christian  dogma  would  not  be  overturned  by  ad- 
mitting that  the  many  varieties  or  races  of  the  descendants 
of  Adam,  brought  about  in  the  long  course  of  time,  constitute 
so  many  new  species.  However,  we  affirm  and  shall  presently 
prove  that  mankind  has  not  only  a  common  origin,  but  forms 
only  one  single  species. 

Second  Observation. — The  most  ardent  defenders  of  the 
polygenist  doctrine  acknowledge  that,  scientifically  speaking, 
^  See  p.  63;  also  Lenormant,  Quatrefages,  Guibert. 


HISTORIC  VALUE   OF   THE   BIBLE.  Ill 

it  is  of  very  recent  date.  Its  partisans,  moreover,  are  few  in 
number,  while  a  very  large  majority  of  scientists  hold  to 
imity  of  species,  and  even  to  imity  of  stock,  Adamic  unity. 
Among  them  are  Blumenbach,  Pritchard,  Linnee,  Buffon, 
Cuvier,  Van  Baer,  Van  Meyer,  Burdach,  Etienne  and  Isidore 
Geoffroy,  Saint-Hilaire,  de  Blainville,  Hugh  Miller,  de  Serres, 
Flourens,  de  Quatrefages,  Milne-Edwards,  Lyell,  Huxley. 
Hence  science  and  revelation  are  by  no  means  at  variance 
on  this  capital  point.  Let  us  remark  further  that  the  tradi- 
tions of  all  nations,  whether  oral  or  recorded  in  the  most 
ancient  books,  are  strikingly  unanimous  in  representing  the 
human  race  as  descended  from  one  single  couple. 

Third  Observation. — a.  Is  it  not  remarkable  that  certain 
scholars  hesitate  to  believe  in  human  races,  unwilling  to 
admit  an3rthing  but  species  in  humanity,  yet  readily  ac- 
knowledge the  existence  of  these  varieties  and  these  races  in 
vegetables  and  animals,  where  the  diversity  is  even  greater 
than  among  men?  Think,  for  example,  of  the  different 
varieties  of  radishes,  of  cabbages,  of  wheat,  of  pears,  of  apples, 
that  we  have  before  our  eyes;  the  vine  alone  has  at  least  a 
thousand  varieties  which  grow  like  the  parent  stock.  And 
in  the  animal  kingdom  we  know  that  there  are  300  kinds 
of  pigeons.  In  the  exposition  of  1858  Europe  alone  fur- 
nished 28  races  of  dogs,  presenting  from  one  to  five  variations 
in  shape;  in  hair,  from  the  thickest  to  the  perfectly  smooth 
or  hairless;  in  color,  from  black  to  white,  with  every  inter- 
mediate shade  and  color;  in  voice,  from  the  dumb  to  the 
loud-baying  hound;  in  the  number  of  caudal  vertebrae  from 
none  to  21 ;  in  the  shape  of  the  head,  from  the  greyhound  to 
the  bulldog.  Observe  that  all  these  races  continuously  and 
indefinitely  reproduce  themselves. 

b.  It  is  still  more  remarkable  that  the  men  who  proclaim 
the  impossibility  of  a  common  descent  for  the  negro  and  the 
white  man  are  the  ones  who  admit  the  simian  origin  of  man 
as  a  reasonable  hypothesis  or  as  a  fact.  What  is  the  explana- 
tion of  this  inconsistency?    Here  is  the  explanation  given 


112  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

by  Van  Baer,  the  most  celebrated  naturalist  of  Russia: 
''This  opinion  [of  the  plurality  of  species  in  the  human  race, 
so  contrary  to  all  the  principles  of  natural  history,  is  it  not  a 
thing  invented  by  the  Anglo-Americans  to  quiet  their  con- 
sciences? When  they  inhumanly  and  barbarously  drove 
out  the  oldest  inhabitants  of  America  and  imported  negroes 
to  make  them  slaves,  was  it  not  natural  to  argue :  '  we  owe 
no  duty  to  these  men,  they  are  of  a  race  inferior  to  us^?" 

What  we  have  just  said  may  suffice  to  destroy  the  value 
of  the  objections  against  the  Bible  raised  by  the  polygenists. 
But  let  us  establish  our  thesis  more  directly. 

First  Argument. — We  may  consider  it  an  axiom  in  zoology 
that  all  individuals  capable  of  reproducing  and  indefinitely 
perpetuating  themselves  are  of  one  and  the  same  species. 
Species,  M.  Flourens  says,  consists  essentially  in  two  ideas: 
that  of  resemblance  and  that  of  fihation.  We  may  define  it  as 
a  collection  of  individuals  possessed  of  common  characteristics, 
which  they  transmit,  by  means  of  reproduction,  to  other 
individuals  capable  of  preserving  these  fundamental  charac- 
teristics, and  susceptible  at  the  same  time  of  secondary 
variations.  In  fact  each  species  is  capable  of  great  modifi- 
cations, but  these  modifications,  which  affect  only  the  acci- 
dental and  not  the  essential  properties,  do  not  change  the 
typical  resemblances  or  the  faculty  of  reproduction;  they 
simply  constitute  what  we  call  varieties,  which  take  in  their 
turn,  when  they  become  permanent,  the  names  of  races. 
Thus  the  bulldog,  the  poodle,  the  hound,  the  terrier,  belong, 
notwithstanding  the  great  difference  in  their  exterior  form, 
to  the  same  species. 

Continual  reproduction,  therefore,  is  the  positive  mark  of 
species :  it  is  this  characteristic  which  enables  us  in  doubtful 
cases  to  decide  whether  plants  or  animals  belong  to  the 
same  species.  This  was  the  opinion  of  Aristotle,  and  it  is 
still  that  of  a  large  majority  of  scientists.  If,  therefore,  it  is 
proved  that  all  the  human  races,  from  the  most  civihzed 
European  to  the    lowest  negro,   are   capable  of  continual 


HISTORIC   VALUE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  113 

reproduction,  there  exists  but  one  human  species.  Now 
this  is  undeniable:  experience  shows  that  human  races, 
even  the  most  barbarous,  united  with  the  most  perfect 
produce  individuals  indefinitely  fruitful.  This  fact  is  so 
incontestably  estabhshed  that  we  do  not  think  it  necessary  to 
support  it  with  authorities.   Hence  our  thesis  is  demonstrated. 

This  is  a  fundamental  and  decisive  proof,  but  let  us  add, 
nevertheless,  a  few  subsidiary  arguments. 

Second  Argument. — Not  only  do  we  find  all  the  human 
races  capable  of  continual  reproduction,  but  resemblance 
between  individuals,  though  it  is  a  much  less  important  char- 
acteristic, is  also  proved.     In  fact, 

a.  The  physical  organization,  in  its  essential  parts,  is  the 
same  in  all  men;  the  points  of  dissimilarity  are  trifling  com- 
pared to  those  of  the  spaniel  and  the  bulldog  or  the  terrier, 
which  all  agree,  nevertheless,  in  ranking  in  the  same  species. 
In  all  the  human  races  we  find  the  same  shaped  skull,  the 
same  cerebral  layers,  the  same  number  of  teeth,  arranged  in 
the  same  order  and  of  the  same  length,  the  same  shape  of 
the  hands,  as  well  as  the  opposable  thumb  and  index-finger, 
the  same  vertical  position,  the  same  vocal  organs  greatly 
perfected.  Nowhere  else  do  we  find  as  great  conformity,  even 
between  different  species.  Let  us  not  lose  sight  of  an  im- 
portant remark  of  Herder 's.  ' '  We  usually, ' '  he  says,  * '  reckon 
only  four  principal  himian  races;  but  the  varieties  are  in 
reahty  inestimable,  we  find  every  intermedium;  colors  are 
blended  in  some,  and,  in  the  same  race,  the  aspect  of  individ- 
uals differs  in  regard  to  color  as  well  as  structure. '' 

b.  From  an  intellectual,  religious,  and  moral  point  of  view 
the  resemblance  is  no  less  great.  All  men  are  endowed  with 
reason  and  the  faculty  of  speaking  an  articulate  language,  of 
expressing  their  thoughts  for  the  sole  purpose  of  communicat- 
ing them;  even  the  negro  is  capable  of  a  remarkable  intellec- 
tual and  moral  development ;  the  most  uncivilized  races  are 
susceptible  of  a  progressive  civilization ;  all  are  endowed  with 
moral  and  religious  sentiment,  though  in  different  degrees. 


114  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

Third  Argument. — They  who  advance  a  new  doctrine 
must  prove  it.  Now  the  polygenists  have  no  positive  proofs 
to  oppose  to  ours.  First,  they  cannot  demonstrate  the  im- 
possibihty  of  several  human  races  springing  from  one  species; 
still  less  can  they  prove  the  impossibihty  of  the  descent  of  all 
men  from  one  couple.  We,  on  the  contrary,  can  give  suffi- 
cient explanation  of  the  differences  we  observe  in  the  various 
races.  It  has  been  proved  that  climate,  the  general  habit 
of  life,  and  heredity  produce  this  diversity.  At  the  same 
time,  if  we  were  unable  to  assign  the  causes  of  these  differ- 
ences, there  would  be  nothing  astonishing  in  our  perplexity, 
for  it  is  a  question  of  origin,  and  we  know  that  questions  of  the 
kind  are  usually  impenetrable  or  wrapt  in  mystery. 

Remarks. — 1st.  The  differences  observed  among  various 
human  races  are  not  as  important  as  many  naturalists  make 
them  out  to  be. 

One  of  the  most  striking  things  when  men  of  different 
races  are  brought  together  is  the  color  of  the  skin.  This 
coloration,  which  ranges  from  the  pale  white  of  the  albino  to 
the  dusky  brown  of  the  negro,  is  due  to  the  pigment,  the  color- 
ing matter  contained  in  the  cells  of  the  skin.  Now  we  know 
that  this  coloration  depends  principally  upon  locality  or 
environment,  that  is,  upon  climate,  air,  water,  heat,  or  cold, 
as  well  as  social  and  religious  conditions.  Thus  the  skin  of 
the  European  becomes  brown  in  the  tropics  and  almost  copper 
color  after  a  long  sojourn  in  Guinea,  and  in  the  Marquesas 
Islands  it  assumes  a  shade  as  dark  as  that  of  the  natives. 
Labor  in  the  field  is  sufficient  to  produce  the  bronze  hue.  The 
negro  in  his  turn  becomes  lighter  in  temperate  climates.  No 
doubt  the  distance  is  great  between  the  white  Swede  and  the 
negro  of  Congo  or  the  Caribbean  Islands,  but  there  is  a  mul- 
titude of  imperceptible  shades  between  these  two  latitudes, 
white,  yellow,  copper-color,  brown,  and  black.  These  effects 
of  environment  are  no  less  evident  in  animals  than  in  man. 
In  Guinea,  birds  and  dogs  are  all  black;  at  the  poles,  on  the 
contrary,  the  animals  soon  become  white  in  ^vinter  unless 


HISTORIC   VALUE    OF   THE    BIBLE.  115 

they  are  housed.  In  short,  color  is  a  thing  so  accessory  that 
a  skilful  breeder,  for  example,  can  in  three  years  give  pigeons 
any  plumage  he  chooses. 

Nor  is  the  hair,  specialists  say,  a  more  distinctive  charac- 
teristic. It  is  woolly,  crinkly,  long  and  glossy,  black  or  red, 
according  to  the  hygienic  regime,  country,  and  the  mixture  of 
races.  Under  the  microscope  the  hair  called  woolly  is  found 
to  be  of  the  same  composition  as  the  other  kinds.  Here  also 
the  grades  are  so  gradual  as  to  be  almost  imperceptible. 

As  to  the  shape,  weight,  and  capacity  of  the  cranium,  there 
is  no  more  variety  among  the  various  races  of  men  than  among 
the  various  races  of  animals.  Why  then  should  these  differ- 
ences, which  are  never  considered  as  indicating  several  species 
when  there  is  question  of  animals,  be  considered  as  an  argu- 
ment against  unity  of  species  when  there  is  question  of  man? 
Moreover,  the  American  Morton,  whose  opinion  on  this  point  is 
shared  by  several  other  polygenists,  has  proved,  by  measuring 
1200  craniums,  that  the  objection  founded  on  the  capacity 
of  the  cranium  is  of  no  real  importance.  In  a  series  of  964 
craniums  examined  by  Wagner  for  size  and  capacity  of 
holding  an  amount  of  brain  matter,  the  skull  of  Dr.  Depuy- 
tren  the  celebrated  physician,  ranked  only  as  the  170th, 
while  that  of  the  mineralogist  Hausman  ranked  640th  in  the 
whole  scale  of  the  964.  Though  it  is  true  that  the  brain  is, 
generally,  developed  in  proportion  to  the  degree  of  intelli- 
gence, yet  facts  prove  that  we  cannot  derive  any  certain 
conclusion  from  the  weight  of  the  brain.  "We  must  accept 
the  fact,"  says  M.  Flourens,  ''that  the  size  of  the  brain  does 
not  indicate  the  amount  of  intelligence. ' ' 

It  is  the  same  in  regard  to  the  shape  of  the  skull  and  the 
facial  angle.  This  facial  angle  averages,  according  to  Camper, 
70  degrees  in  the  negro  and  85  in  the  pure  Greek  type:  this 
variation  of  15  degrees  cannot  evidently  constitute  a  specific 
difference,  particularly  as  every  intermediate  degree  is  found 
between  the  negro  and  the  scale  of  the  Greek  statues.  Very 
different  is  the  variation  between  the  facial  angle  of  the  negro 


116  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

and  that  of  a  full-grown  chimpanzee :  the  latter  hardly  meas- 
ures 35  degrees.  Haeckel  himself  acknowledges  that  the  shape 
of  the  skull  affords  no  basis  for  classifying  the  human  species. 

There  are  long  and  short  heads  and  all  intermediaries  in  the 
same  people.  A  remarkable  thing  is  that  in  the  prognathic 
type  the  protruding  maxillaries,  resembhng  the  snout  of  an 
animal,  are  not  that  shape  at  birth,  but  become  so  with  age; 
we  find  them,  moreover,  in  all  peoples,  even  the  most  civiUzed. 

2d.  To  understand  the  possibility  of  reaching  the  most  dis- 
tant islands  in  order  to  people  them,  we  need  only  remark 
that  nowhere  is  communication  between  one  country  and 
another  more  difficult  than  in  the  South  Sea  Islands;  yet  we 
have  evidence  which  proves  that  these  difficulties  are  not 
only  surmountable,  but  that  they  have  been  really  overcome : 
the  marked  resemblance  in  the  idiom,  customs,  traditions, 
and  rehgion  of  the  various  peoples  of  the  Pacific  will  not  per- 
mit us  to  doubt  the  reality  of  migrations  to  these  latitudes. 

As  to  the  peopling  of  America,  in  particular, there  is  no  cer- 
tainty that  the  American  continent  was  always  separated 
from  Asia  as  it  is  now;  besides,  it  requires  only  36  hours  to 
go  from  Asia  to  America.  In  addition  to  this,  the  cold  cur- 
rent from  the  Arctic  Ocean  flowing  through  Behring  Strait 
brings  to  the  American  continent  all  the  vessels  wrecked  in  the 
Pacific  Ocean.  Thus  since  1852,  that  is,  since  California  was 
settled  by  the  whites,  there  have  reached  the  country  some 
thirty  ships  from  Asia,  sixteen  of  which  contained  passengers. 
Finally,  there  are  proofs  of  various  kinds  which  estabhsh  the 
fact  that  several  nations  of  the  Old  World,  particularly  the 
Phenicians,  the  Norman-Scandinavians,  the  Indians,  the 
Chinese,  the  Japanese,  contributed  to  people  America.  The 
yellow  race  is  still  represented  in  Brazil  by  the  Botocondos. 

3d.  The  objection  against  unity  of  species  founded  on  the 
question  of  language  is  of  no  value  whatever.^  What  rela- 
tion can  there  be  between  the  different  species  of  men 
and  the  conventional  meaning  attached  to  certain  sounds, 

^Schanz,  I.,  ch.  17;  Walworth,  ch.  27;  Thein,  Anthrop.,  ch.  9  ff.: 
The  Bible,  etc.,  p.  iv. 


HISTORIC   VALUE   OF   THE   BIBLE.  117 

when  among  the  same  people,  as  it  sometimes  happens,  the 
same  sounds  convey  different  meanings  ?  We  know  what  per- 
petual changes  im written  language  is  subject  to,  and  in  how 
short  a  time  savage  nations  can  change  their  language.  The 
case  is  very  different  with  languages  spoken  by  partially  civil- 
ized people  and  languages  fixed  by  writing  and  enriched  by 
Hterary  monuments.  Men  of  the  same  region  by  no  means 
follow  the  same  grammar  and  the  same  dictionary.  It  is 
estimated  that  the  Enghsh  peasantry  use  only  about  three 
hundred  words,  though  the  Enghsh  language  contains  about 
one  hundred  thousand.  Hence  philologists,  Renan  among 
others,  while  denying  the  primitive  unity  of  language,  acknowl- 
edge that  it  affords  no  proof  against  the  primitive  unity  of 
species.  ''Whatever  the  diversity  existing,'^  says  Max 
Miiller,  "in  the  forms  and  in  the  roots  of  languages,  it  affords 
no  conclusive  argument  against  the  possibihty  of  a  common 
origin  of  these  languages."  The  Scripture,  moreover,  attest- 
ing the  confusion  of  languages,  it  is  not  necessary  that  we 
should  find  a  common  derivation  or  origin  for  languages. 
Let  us  add  that  philology  itself  tends  more  and  more  to 
prove  the  unity  of  origin  of  all  men;  it  is  this  science  which 
has  afforded  us  positive  proof  of  the  common  origin  of  peoples 
inhabiting  the  opposite  extremities  of  the  earth. 

5.  Antiquity  of  the  Human  Race} 

Life  has  not  always  existed  upon  the  earth,  and  among  the 
beings  endowed  with  life  man  is  the  most  recent;  he  came 
after  the  plants  and  animals.  Here  are  points  upon  which 
natural  science  agrees  with  the  Bible.  But  while  Genesis 
seems  to  indicate  that  it  is  only  a  few  thousand  years  since 
man  appeared  upon  the  earth,  there  are  naturalists  and  his- 
torians who  unhesitatingly  affirm  that  the  human  race  is  at 

*  See  p.  63;  especially  Zahm,  Bible,  Science,  etc.,  p.  iii;  also  Lenor- 
rnant;  Thein,  Anthrop.,  ch.  8  ff.;  The  Bible,  etc.,  p.  iv;  Schanz,  L,  ch. 
18;  A.  C.  Q.  xix.  260;  C.  W.  xl.  318,  444. 


118  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

least  one  hundred  thousand  years  old;  others  say  even  a  hun- 
dred thousand  centuries.  We  can  readily  understand  that 
they  who  hold  that  we  are  descended  from  anthropoid  mon- 
keys must  needs  insist  ujjon  great  antiquity,  for  no  doubt  it 
took  a  good  portion  of  time  for  man  to  rise  from  the  state  of 
the  beast  to  the  moral,  intellectual,  and  religious  condition 
found  among  the  oldest  races.^  Let  us  consider  what  the 
Bible  and  science  teach  on  the  subject  of  the  age  of  man. 
We  shall  see  that,  here  again,  there  is  no  opposition  between 
these  two  legitimate  means  of  knowledge. 

1.  The  Uncertainty  of  Biblical  Chronology. — The 
Scripture  makes  no  formal  statement  in  regard  to  the  age  of 
man,  and  the  Church,  which  is  not  obliged  to  regulate  ques- 
tions of  chronology,  has  given  no  decision  upon  the  subject. 
There  is,  it  is  true,  a  chronology  called  biblical,  because  based 
upon  the  elements  of  Scripture.  But  what  is  the  value  of  a 
chronology  of  this  kind,  the  work  of  man?  To  appreciate  its 
weight  as  an  authority  we  have  only  to  remember  that  there 
are  almost  as  many  chronologic  systems  of  the  Bible  as  there 
are  exegetes.  Des  Vignolles,  in  1738,  counted  more  than  two 
hundred,  varying  to  the  extent  of  thirty-five  centuries,  yet 
notwithstanding  all  these  efforts  we  have  never  succeeded  in 
bringing  order  out  of  this  chaos.  Therefore,  the  learned  Abbe 
Hir  declares  that "  bibhcal  chronology  is  fluctuating  and  unde- 
cided, and  that  it  is  for  human  sciences  to  find  the  date  of  the 
creation  of  our  species.'^ 

What  is  the  reason  of  this  uncertainty?  It  arises  from 
various  causes,  the  chief  of  which  are  these : 

a.  We  do  not  always  know  the  true  figures  originally  written 
by  the  sacred  writers  either  in  the  Pentateuch  or  the  other 
inspired  books;  all  the  ancient  texts  we  possess  disagree  in 

i 

^  On  Primeval  Man  not  a  Savage  cf.,  besides  the  authors  already 
quoted  in  this  chapter,  Thebaud,  GentiUsm,  ch.  3;  Br.  W.  ix.  (often); 
A.  C.  Q.  xi.  226;  C.  W.  ix.  766,  xiii.  492,  xxix.  602;  B.  C.  Y.,  The 
Remote  Antiquity  of  Man  not  Proven;  Primeval  Man  not  a  Savage 
(London,  1877). 


HISTORIC   VALUE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  119 

this  matter.  According  to  the  Hebrew  and  that  of  the  Vulgate, 
for  example,  only  1656  years  elapsed  from  the  fall  of  Adam 
to  the  deluge;  and  from  the  time  of  Noe  to  Abraham,  292. 
According  to  the  text  of  the  Septuagint  these  figures  are 
respectively  2262  and  1172;  finally,  according  to  the  Sa- 
maritan Pentateuch  they  are  1307  and  942.  This  disagree- 
ment is  not  remarkable;  for  we  know  that  in  successive  tran- 
scriptions, nothing  is  more  easily  altered  than  figures,  par- 
ticularly when  every  people  has  its  special  divisions  of  time, 
and  the  majority  of  nations  a  method  of  computation  entirely 
different  from  ours.  Errors,  therefore,  would  naturally  be 
made  either  in  the  copies  or  the  versions.  God  evidently 
is  not  obliged  to  work  miracles  to  preserve  scriptural  dates 
unaltered,  for  they  have  nothing  whatever  to  do  with  morals 
or  dogma,  or  with  the  substance  of  the  sacred  text;  our  sal- 
vation and  the  fulfilment  of  our  duty  are  in  no  way  compro- 
mised because  we  are  relatively  ignorant  of  the  number  of 
years  which  elapsed  from  the  fall  of  Adam  to  the  coming  of 
the  Redeemer. 

b.  We  have  no  assurance  that  we  possess  complete  genea- 
iogic  fists.  All  that  we  have  in  the  shape  of  historic  records 
concerning  this  period  is  the  fists  of  the  antediluvian  and 
postdiluvian  patriarchs  contained  in  Genesis.  Now  there 
is  no  doubt  that  in  these  fists  there  is  at  least  one  hiatus,  or 
perhaps  an  interpolation.  May  there  not  in  fact  be  a  great 
many?  This  is  very  probable,  particularly  as  the  only  object 
of  the  Oriental  nations,  in  their  genealogies,  is  to  fofiow  the 
direct  line  regardless  of  intermediate  branches ;  hence  whole 
generations,  that  is,  centuries,  may  have  dropped  out  of  the 
calculation.  This  remark  of  M.  WaUon  is  further  confirmed 
by  a  large  number  of  analogous  omissions,  proved  to  exist 
in  other  books  of  the  Scriptures.  These  systematic  omis- 
sions ought,  it  would  seem,  to  be  assigned  to  a  mnemonic 
cause.  Thus,  it  is  evident  that  St.  Matthew  expressly  ex- 
cludes the  names  of  three  well-known  kings  in  order  to  make 
the  dry  fist  of  names  fomung  the  genealogical  tree  of  the 


120  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

Messias  more  easily  retained.  These  omissions,  the  extent 
of  which  we  do  not  know,  make  it  impossible  to  determine 
the  period  of  man's  appearance  on  earth. 

The  variations  which  we  find  in  the  figures  of  the  three 
sources  have  still  another  no  less  important  cause.  The 
Septuagint  and  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  regularly  add  one 
hundred  years  to  several  Hebrew  dates.  Why?  We  are 
obliged  to  answer  with  St.  Augustine,  who  had  already 
observed  this  fact,  ''We  give  no  explanation  where  the  ex- 
planation would  be  unsatisfactory."  However  this  may  be, 
as  the  chronology  of  the  Septuagint  has  been  adopted  by 
all  the  Fathers  of  the  Greek  Church  and  by  the  majority  of 
the  Latin  Fathers,  there  is  nothing  to  prevent  our  accepting 
it.  Following  it,  we  estimate  the  age  of  man  to  be  8065  years. 
At  the  same  time  there  is  no  reason  why  this  figure  may  not 
be  subject  to  any  modifications  necessary  to  meet  the  just 
claims  of  history  and  paleontology. 

But  may  not  profane  science  now  remove  the  doubts  still 
imsolved  by  the  study  of  the  sacred  text?  This  is  what  we 
are  about  to  examine  by  consulting  successively  paleontology 
and  the  history  of  ancient  peoples. 

II.  Data  of  Science. — A.  Geology  and  Paleontology. 
— Despite  the  figures  hazarded  without  proof  by  a  certain 
number  of  geologists  and  paleontologists,  science,  so  far, 
offers  nothing  absolutely  certain  on  the  subject.  The  exist- 
ence of  man  in  the  tertiary  period  is  still  unproved.  We 
know  that  in  1884  the  Association  for  the  Advancement  of 
Science  held  at  Blois  one  of  its  most  important  sessions,  and 
that  forty  members  of  the  congress  were  deputed  to  study 
the  layers  of  Thenay  belonging  to  the  tertiary  period,  and 
which  contained,  it  was  said,  a  quantity  of  flints  cut  by  the 
hand  of  man.  Now  the  result  of  their  careful  investigation 
was  to  convince  them  that  man  did  not  exist  at  that  period, 
and  that  the  marks  on  the  flints  were  due  simply  to  physical 
causes.  Nor  is  there  any  more  authority  for  the  flints  con- 
cerning which  there  has  been  much  discussion ;  for  example, 


HISTORIC  VALtTE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  121 

those  found  in  the  neighborhood  of  Aurillac  and  the  vicinity 
of  Lisbon.  In  regard  to  the  quaternary  period,  which  con- 
tains a  quantity  of  human  fossils  the  age  and  authenticity 
of  which  are  incontestable,  let  us  hear  the  opinion  of  a  master 
of  geological  science,  M.  Lapparrent:  ''That  part  of  the 
modern  era  called  the  quaternary  epoch  is  characterized  by 
the  appearance  of  man  on  the  earth.  .  .  .  This  period,  not- 
withstanding its  proximity  to  our  own  time,  is  still  enveloped 
in  mystery.  The  succession  of  the  deposits  is  sometimes  very 
obscure.  The  absence  or  the  rarity  of  organic  remains  ren- 
ders it  particularly  difficult  to  determine  the  relative  age. 
.  .  .  Science  has  not  yet  achieved  a  chronometer  enabling  it 
to  measure  past  time,  even  the  period  immediately  preceding 
our  own.  It  is  wise  to  expect  this  achievement  only  of  the 
future,  and,  for  our  part,  we  are  satisfied  with  having  shown 
how  baseless  are  aU  these  calculations  generously  distributing 
himdreds  and  thousands  of  centuries  between  the  various 
phases  of  the  quaternary  period. '^ 

This  is  the  last  word  of  science  up  to  the  present  time. 
Moreover,  Lyell  himself,  so  given  to  exaggeration  on  this 
point,  acknowledges  that,  ''  In  the  present  state  of  our  knowl- 
edge, the  attempts  to  compare  the  chronologic  relations  of 
the  periods  of  upheavals  .  .  .  and  of  the  retirement  of  the 
glaciers  .  .  .  must  be  considered  as  simple  conjectures.'' 
Other  serious  paleontologists  hold  the  same  language,  and 
Carl  Vogt  does  not  hesitate  to  declare  that,  "  So  far,  all  efforts 
to  establish  a  means  of  chronologically  estimating  the  time 
that  has  elapsed  since  man  appeared  upon  the  earth,  have 
been  ineffectual."  Though,  in  truth,  this  declaration  has 
not  prevented  him  from  heaping  hypotheses  upon  hypotheses, 
and  from  attributing  57,600  years  of  existence  to  a  human 
skeleton  found  at  New  Orleans. 

Chronometers} — The  authorities  cited  excuse  us  from  speak- 

*  The  author  speaks  of  Geological  Chronometers,  a  term  used  to 
designate  such  articles  and  objects  found  in  the  various  strata  of  the 
earth  which  may  serve  as  time-measures  to  indicate  the  age  of  man's 


122  CHRISTIAN'  APOLOGETICS. 

ing  in  detail  of  the  various  chronometers,  the  subject  of  so 
much  discussion  and  which,  it  is  said,  afford  conclusive  proof 
of  the  great  age  of  man.  A  word,  however,  of  some  of  them: 
it  will  give  us  some  idea  of  the  precaution  necessary  in  re- 
searches of  this  kind  in  order  to  arrive  at  even  a  probable 
conclusion. 

It  was  believed  that  proofs  of  the  antiquity  of  man  were 
to  be  found  in  human  fossils  discovered  in  caves,  where  they 
were  mixed  with  the  bones  of  animals  of  extinct  races;  in 
splinters  of  flints  which  had  served  as  arms  or  utensils  to  our 
ancestors;  in  the  formation  of  the  deltas,  particularly  those 
of  the  Nile  and  the  Mississippi;  in  the  peat-moors;  in  the 
diluvium  of  valleys  and  plains;  in  the  downs  of  Denmark 
and  Norway;  in  the  lake  dwellings  of  Smtzerland;  in  the 
stalactites  and  stalagmites ;  and  in  the  kitchen  utensils  of  the 
Scandinavians. 

1st.  In  order  to  draw  a  scientific  conclusion  from,  for  ex- 
ample, the  bones  of  human  fossils,  we  must  at  least  be  very 
certain,  1st,  that  these  fossils  have  been  found  in  strata 
older  than  the  quaternary  period ;  2d,  that  their  appearance 
in  virgin  soil  is  not  due  to  the  hand  of  man,  or  caused  by  some 
upheaval  of  nature;  3d,  that  their  origin  has  not  been 
altered  either  by  the  falsification  of  a  museum,  or  by  a  sys- 
tematic interpretation.  Now  none  of  these  things  are 
estabhshed  with  any  certainty.  Moreover,  we  repeat  that 
it  is  not  easy  to  distinguish  the  superior  strata  of  the  tertiary 
period  from  the  primary  strata  of  the  quaternary;  that  we 
have  no  means  of  appreciating  the  duration  of  the  geological 
formations,  of  estimating  how  much  older  one  is  than 
another,  or  of  determining  how  far  back  each  of  these  for- 
mations dates. 

2d.  The  same  remarks  apply  to  cut,  pohshed,  or  other  kinds 
of  flinte  foimd  in  large  numbers  in  the  bosom  of  the  earth, 
and  which  may  have  served  as  arms  or  utensils  to  our  an- 

presence  upon  earth  and  the  duration  of  the  different  phases  in  the 
development  of  the  race. — Editor. 


HISTORIC  VALUE  OF  THE  BIBLE.  123 

cestors;  we  must  also  be  sure  that  the  object  found  is  truly 
a  product  of  human  mdustry;  that  the  strata  in  which  it  lay 
was  free  from  the  action  of  man  and  the  violence  of  the 
elements;  then  we  must  be  able  to  determine  with  certainty 
the  age  of  the  strata  itself.  Now  let  us  hear  the  opinion  of  a 
competent  authority  like  M.  Dumoulins:  ''I  declare  in  my 
own  name  and  in  that  of  M.  Gourges  that,  in  the  thirty-five 
years  that  we  have  been  studying  these  implements,  we  have 
never  found  any  in  strata  undisturbed  by  the  hand  of 
man."  As  to  the  cut  flints,  particularly,  we  know  that 
the  marks  upon  them  which  are  presumed  to  indicate 
that  they  are  the  result  of  human  industry,  are  frequently 
only  the  effect  of  lightning,  of  the  sun's  heat,  of  sudden 
changes  of  temperature,  of  pressure,  of  shocks,  etc.  At  the 
congress  of  Lisbon  the  following  opinion  was  given  by  its 
president.  Dr.  Virchow:  ''Ten  years  ago  I  put,"  he  says, 
''this  question  to  myself:  Can  we  recognize  in  a  few  spHnters 
of  flint  whether  their  form  is  or  is  not  the  result  of  intention? 
...  It  is  a  question  likely  to  excite  much  discussion  at  several 
congresses.  .  .  .  Here  we  disagree,  and  there  are  many  natu- 
ralists who  deny  that  these  flints  are  the  work  of  man.  ...  At 
the  next  congress  I  will  submit  samples,  bearing  all  the 
characters  claimed,  which  I  have  collected  under  conditions 
which  make  it  impossible  that  man  could  have  had  anything 
to  do  with  them." 

3d.  The  formation  of  deltas  and  alluvia  generally  was  also 
supposed,  for  a  time,  to  furnish  useful  results.  The  term 
alluvia  is  applied  to  formations  produced  by  the  denudation 
of  the  soil,  great  rains,  inundations,  or  the  deposits  of  rivers. 
It  is  now  well  established  that  nothing  is  more  irregular  than 
such  formations,  for  these  deposits  and  inundations  vary 
considerably  according  to  circumstances.  They  must  also 
have  been  much  more  rapid  before  the  mountains  were  de- 
nuded of  vegetation.  As  to  the  objects  found  there,  it  is 
clear  from  the  nature  of  the  soil  itself  that  they  do  not  belong 
to  it.     Now  the  force  of  currents,  Lyell  himself  acknowledges, 


124  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

may  bring  together  in  a  very  short  time  objects  which  perhaps 
have  been  separated  for  centuries.  Mr.  J.  Ferguson,  an 
English  geologist  living  in  India,  gives  an  instance  of  an 
inundation  during  which  bricks  from  the  foundation  of  a 
house  which  he  had  built,  were  carried  away  by  the  waters 
and  buried  in  the  bed  of  the  river  at  a  depth  of  from  thirty 
to  forty  feet.  ''The  river,"  he  says,  ''has  passed  on,  and  a 
new  village  now  stands  on  the  spot  where  my  bungalow 
stood,  but  forty  feet  above  the  ruins;  and  any  one  who 
chooses  to  dig  on  the  spot  may  find  my  reliquia  there,  and 
form  what  theory  he  likes  as  to  their  antiquity  or  my  age." 
Let  us  further  remark  that  Carl  Vogt  claims  158,400  year.^ 
for  the  formation  of  the  delta  of  the  Mississippi,  while  Si'j 
John  Lubbock  thinks  it  required  only  3000  years,  and  M.' 
Schmidt  only  1700. 

4th.  Nor  do  the  peat  moors  or  bogs  afford  anything  more 
conclusive.  These  bogs  consist  of  accumulations  of  detrite 
vegetable  matter  from  which  a  combustible  is  formed.  It 
is  impossible  to  find  in  these  accumulations  any  means  of 
estimating  their  vertical  increase.  According  to  experiments 
made  in  East  Friesland  it  would  require  only  two  hundred 
years  for  the  formation  of  a  stratum  of  peat  thirty  feet  in 
depth,  while  according  to  the  theory  of  M.  Boucher  de  Perthes 
it  would  take  no  less  than  three  thousand  years!  Burmeister 
affirms,  on  his  part,  that  he  has  seen  completely  exhausted 
peat-bogs  grow  again  to  the  depth  of  five  feet  in  thirty  years. 

The  depths  at  which  objects  are  found  buried  in  the  peat- 
moors  give  us  no  reliable  information ;  for,  on  the  one  hand, 
we  know  that  the  more  recent  and  liquid  the  formation  the 
more  easily  objects  sink  in  it;  and  that,  on  the  other  hand,  if 
we  were  to  accept  the  theoretical  estimates  of  some  geologists 
in  regard  to  the  alleged  slowness  of  peat  formations,  the 
objects  contained  in  them  must  be  antediluvian  productions ; 
while,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  coins,  axes,  and  kitchen  utensils 
found  in  them  are  nearly  all  of  Roman  origin.  What  con- 
fidence can  be  placed  in  such  calculations? 


HISTORIC   VALUE    OF   THE    BIBLE.  125 

5th.  We  know  that  lake  dwellings,  dwellings  built  upon  piles, 
have  been  discovered  in  large  numbers  recently,  particularly 
in  the  lakes  of  Switzerland.  It  was  hoped  that  the  study  of 
the  horn  and  stone  implements,  the  household  effects,  and 
the  skulls  of  the  inhabitants,  which  were  also  found  there, 
would  throw  some  Ught  upon  science.  But  no  results  were 
obtained:  the  oldest  skulls  discovered  are  in  every  respect 
like  those  of  the  Swiss  of  the  present  day;  the  plants  and 
animals  are  also  the  same  as  ours.  Hence  eminent  geologists 
think  that  these  dwellings  possess,  relatively,  but  Httle 
antiquity.  Hochstetter  thinks  it  very  probable  that  the 
lake  cities  date  no  farther  back  than  the  tenth  century  before 
the  Christian  era.  Franz  Maurer  thinks  them  still  nearer 
our  time,  and  Hastier  dates  the  most  recent  from  the  third 
century  before  Christ.  As  to  the  accumulation  of  gravel 
imder  which  they  are  buried,  Wagner  declares  that  it  may 
have  been  formed  in  as  many  moments  as  Morlot  assigns 
years  for  it. 

Conclusion. — Science,  notwithstanding  all  its  efforts,  is 
far  from  furnishing  us  any  certain  information  in  regard  to 
the  antiquity  of  the  human  species.  BibUcal  chronology,  on 
the  other  hand,  leaves  us  in  uncertainty.  Therefore  there  is 
no  possibility  of  contradiction  between  the  sacred  text  and 
natural  sciences. 

B.  History. — We  know  that  all  nations,  particularly 
the  Egyptians,  Chaldeans,  Hindoos,  and  Chinese,  have  the 
vanity  to  attribute  to  themselves  a  fabulous  antiquity  which 
is  lost  in  the  night  of  time.^  Cicero  has  already  remarked 
this  fact.     Let  us  see  if  history  verifies  their  claim. 

1.  Egypt. — The  accounts  of  Greek  travellers  who  visited 
Egypt  in  ancient  times  give  us  information  in  regard  to  its 
chronology.  But  the  data  furnished  by  Solon,  Herodotus, 
Varro,  and  Diodorus  of  Sicily  are  so  vague  and,  above  all,  so 
contradictory  that  no  reliance  can  be  placed  upon  their 

^  D.  R.  AprU  77.  On  the  religious  systems  of  these  peoples  see 
Schanz,  II.,  ch.  2,  3. 


126  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

figures.  This,  however,  is  not  astonishing:  these  writers  did 
not  know  the  language  of  Egypt,  hence  immediate  sources  of 
information  were  closed  to  them.  They  ma}^  also  have 
misunderstood  the  information  furnished  by  interpreters; 
and  what  guarantee,  moreover,  have  we  of  the  accuracy  or 
truthfulness  of  the  latter?  As  to  Manetho,  who  Hved  in 
Egypt,  but  only  about  the  year  300  before  Christ,  we  must 
remember  that  his  history,  written  in  Greek,  is  no  longer  in 
existence ;  all  that  remains  of  it  is  a  summary  of  its  chronology, 
which  was  preserved  to  us  by  Eusebius ;  but  how  may  such 
a  document  help  us  to  reach  a  satisfactory  result?  First  of 
all,  the  extreme  insignificance  of  the  facts  which  he  relates 
shows  us  that  he  was  a  man  very  imperfectly  acquainted  with 
the  early  history  of  Egypt.  Then,  though  the  monuments 
prove  that  several  kings  reigned  together  during  a  certain 
time,  Manetho  enumerates  all  the  dynasties  as  if  the  reigns 
had  been  successive.  Finally,  in  thirty-seven  cases  in  which 
we  can  check  the  figures  of  this  historian  by  those  of  the 
papyrus  of  Turin,  which  contains  a  list  of  the  kings  of  Egypt, 
we  find  that  he  increases  the  duration  of  twenty-two  reigns 
and  diminishes  that  of  six. 

Let  us  consider  the  third  source  of  information.  This 
consists  of  the  lists  containing  the  names  of  the  kings  of 
Egypt,  particularly  the  papyrus  of  Turin,  unfortunately 
incomplete,  and  the  tablets  of  Abydos,  Saqqarah,  and  Karnak. 
We  have  also  the  hieroglyphic  inscriptions  relating,  on  the 
walls  of  the  temples,  the  exploits  of  the  Egyptian  monarchs, 
the  stelse  of  the  court  officers  and  of  various  other  personages, 
the  Apis  stelse  and  figured  monuments  of  all  kinds. 

But  in  none  of  these  do  we  find  any  complete  information. 
Moreover,  as  Fr.  Lenormant  says,  ''the  greatest  obstacle 
to  the  establishment  of  a  regular  Egyptian  chronology  is  the 
fact  that  the  Egyptians  themselves  never  had  a  chronology." 
And  how  could  they  have  a  chronologic  system  when  they 
had  no  era?  Thus  Marie tte  insists  that  modern  science  will 
fail  in  every  attempt  to  restore  what  the  Egyptians  never 


HISTORIC   VALUE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  127 

possessed.  Brugsch  is  of  the  same  opinion:  ''In  the  present 
state  of  things  no  man  living,"  he  says,  ''is  capable  of  re- 
moving the  obstacles  which  hinder  the  re-estabhshment  of 
the  original  Hst  of  kings  contained  in  the  fragments  of  the 
papyrus  of  Turin."  The  greatest  obstacle  is  probably  the 
fact  that  the  Egyptian  historians  confine  themselves  to 
stating  the  duration  of  each  reign  without  mentioning  whether 
the  sovereign  reigned  alone  or  jointly  with  another;  and  that 
they  represent  dynasties  as  consecutive  which  were  contem- 
poraneous. 

The  historic  documents  of  Egypt,  therefore,  furnish  no 
certain  chronology,  nor  can  they  demonstrate  that  the 
chronology  derived  from  the  Septuagint  is  too  short.  This 
is  the  well-grounded  conclusion  of  the  Abbe  Vigouroux. 
Scholars,  he  adds,  who  claim  more  time,  base  their  demand 
upon  a  personal  opinion  which  nothing  obliges  us  to 
accept. 

If  we  want  a  striking  proof  of  the  truth  of  these  assertions, 
it  is  to  be  found  in  the  very  disagreement  of  the  various 
modern  historians  who  have  dealt  with  the  history  of  Egypt. 
While  Bockh  places  the  accession  of  Menes,  the  first  known 
king,  in  the  year  5702  before  our  era,  Mariette  and  Lenor- 
mant  assign  it  to  the  year  5004,  Brugsch  to  4455,  Bunsen 
to  3623  or  3059,  Wilkinson  to  2691.  As  Mr.  George  Raw- 
linson  wisely  remarks:  "It  is  as  if  the  best  authorities  on 
Roman  history  were  to  tell  us,  the  one  that  the  Republic 
was  founded  in  508,  the  others  in  3508,  before  Christ."  Let 
us  conclude  our  remarks  upon  the  antiquity  of  the  Egyptians 
with  an  observation  of  the  Abbe  Vigouroux:  "We  must 
acknowledge  that  Egypt  existed  before  the  time  of  Menes, 
and  that  it  is  notably  more  ancient.  Go  back  as  far  as  we 
will  in  its  history,  we  find  it  in  a  state  of  advanced  civiliza- 
tion, in  possession  of  the  arts,  of  inscriptive  monuments,  and 
of  religion.  .  .  .  But  here,  as  in  questions  of  prehistoric  paleon- 
tology and  archaeology,  we  lack  chronometers,  we  can  arrive 
at  no  certain  conclusions,   and  we  must  only  repeat  that 


128  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

Genesis,  correctly  understood,  leaves  the  Egyptologist  per- 
fectly free  to  claim  for  Egypt  the  antiquity  which  a  careful 
study  of  its  monuments  indicates." 

2.  India. — ^''The  Hindoos,"  says  Kruse,  ''have  no  histori- 
cal works.  They  have  wrapped  ancient  events  in  a  poeti- 
cal cloak  of  myths,  without  any  attempt  at  chronology." 
Duncker  assures  us  that  we  can  have  no  certain  knowledge 
of  them  prior  to  the  year  800  before  the  Christian  era.^  In 
the  country  itself  no  historical  monument  dating  farther 
back  than  the  third  century  before  the  Christian  era  has  been 
found.  Xavier  Raymond  tells  us  in  his  history  of  India  that 
''  the  fragments  which  remain  of  the  annals  of  the  people  of 
India  are  so  mingled  with  fable  and  disfigured  by  the  most 
extravagant  chronology  that  it  is  impossible  for  the  most 
patient  investigator  to  find  a  thread  to  guide  him  in  the 
perplexing  labyrinth.  We  find  no  certain  date  in  the  history 
of  the  country  before  the  invasion  of  Alexander  (327-325 
B.c.).^'  Finally,  Bournouf  assures  us  that  ''it  requires  an 
act  of  faith  to  believe  that  the  literature  of  India  is  ancient ; 
for  among  their  numerous  works  no  historical  books  have  yet 
been  found."  If  Sanscrit  Hterature  permits  us  to  go  farther 
back  than  history  proper,  it  furnishes  no  satisfactory  data  in 
regard  to  the  antiquity  of  man.  According  to  Max  Miiller,  the 
most  ancient  hymns  of  the  Vedas  date  no  farther  back  than 
the  year  1200  before  Christ.  Hence  Barthelemy  St.  Hilaire 
concludes  that,  "despite  all  the  efforts  of  our  profound  and 
careful  study,  we  must  despair  of  resurrecting  a  past  annihi- 
lated by  the  very  actors  in  this  past.  India  has  not  willed  to 
come  forth  from  her  dreams;  we  cannot  evoke  her  historically 
from  the  tomb." 

3.  China. — Notwithstanding  the  earnest  efforts  not  only 
of  the  present  but  of  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries 
to  unravel  the  chronology  of  China,  we  have  almost  as  little 
knowledge  of  its  early  history  as  of  India.  Nor  is  this  re- 
markable: in  fact  the  inhabitants  of  the  Celestial  Empire 

^  See  Chatard,  essay  24. 


HISTORIC   VALUE    OF   THE    BIBLE.  129 

in  primitive  ages  had  no  era,  properly  speaking,  and  pre- 
served no  historic  records;  later,  about  the  year  213  before 
Christ,  Chihouang-ti,  the  founder  of  the  Tsin  dynasty,  ordered 
all  the  historical  books  of  the  kingdom  to  be  destroyed  under 
penalty  of  death.  In  addition  to  this,  ancient  monuments, 
with  which  we  might  verify  or  modify  dates,  are  totally 
wanting.  Those  that  have  been  brought  forward  do  not 
bear  critical  examination.  Thus  Balfour  justly  reniarks: 
''The  primitive  history  of  the  Middle  Kingdom  is  a  sealed 
book."  The  knowledge  we  have  of  it  indicates  that  the 
chronology  derived  from  the  Septuagint  is  sufficient  for  the 
development  of  its  history. 

4.  Chaldea. — The  ancient  monuments  recently  discovered 
in  Chaldea  give  us  a  better  knowledge  of  its  chronology. 
The  historic  records  of  the  country  throw  but  Httle  light 
upon  it;  all  that  relates  to  chronology  in  the  fragments  of 
Berosus,  priest  of  Bel  at  Babylon,  was  regarded  as  fabulous 
even  by  the  Greeks.  It  is  quite  otherwise  with  the  cunei- 
form inscriptions:  they  furnish  us  with  more  precise  dates 
in  regard  to  Chaldea  and  Babylon,  starting  from  the  era  of 
Nabonassar,  747  before  Christ.  If,  however,  these  dates 
are  correct,  the  chronology  derived  from  the  Septuagint  is 
insufficient,  and  we  must  admit  that  there  are  gaps  and 
omissions  in  biblical  chronology.  But  what  means  have  we  of 
verifying  the  accuracy  of  these  dates? 

Conclusion. — ''The  history  of  India,  and  even  that  of 
China  in  its  authentic  parts, '/  concludes  the  Abb^  Vigouroux, 
"may  easily  be  included  in  the  series  of  centuries  admitted 
by  the  Greek  and  Latin  Fathers.  As  to  Egypt,  the  extreme 
antiquity  of  Menes  is  by  no  means  proved,  and  there  is  much 
evidence  tending  to  diminish  it.  It  may  be  argued,  it  is 
true,  that  the  state  of  civifization  in  Egypt  during  the  reign 
of  the  most  ancient  kings  known  to  us  indicates,  as  do  also 
geological  and  paleontological  discoveries,  a  longer  period  of 
time  than  that  furnished  by  the  Septuagint.  But  no  fixed 
or  absolute  calculation  is  possible  here,  hence  we  can  only 


130  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

repeat  to  scholars:  Establish  the  antiquity  of  man  with  sohd 
proofs,  and  the  Bible  will  not  contradict  you.'! 

V.  The  Bible  and  Modern  Discoveries  in  Egypt  and 

Assyria.^ 

We  cannot  terminate  these  notes  upon  the  relations 
between  the  Bible  and  science  without  speaking  of  the 
unexpected  testimony  borne  to  the  truth  of  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures by  the  modern  discoveries  made  in  Egypt,  Chaldea, 
and  Assyria.  The  inhabitants  of  these  countries  are  the 
people  who  had  most  intercourse  with  the  Hebrews.  The 
Hebrews,  the  Assyrians,  and  the  Chaldeans  had  a  common 
origin;  for  centuries  they  trod  the  same  soil,  lived  the  same 
hfe,  followed  the  same  customs.  They  were  brought  again 
into  immediate  relations  when  the  Israelites  were  led  into 
exile  by  Nabuchodonosor. 

As  to  Egypt,  it  is  well  known  that  the  Jews  dwelt  there  for 
several  centuries.  Hence  it  was  not  possible  to  exhume 
these  people  from  the  tomb,  so  to  speak,  without  casting 
hght  upon  the  facts  consigned  to  Scripture.  It  was  truly 
providential  that  at  the  very  moment  when  rationalism 
was  inventing  new  weapons  mth  which  to  sap  the  foundations 
of  the  divine  work,  God  caused  the  Chaldeans  and  the  Egyp- 
tians to  live  again  to  attest  and  proclaim  the  veracity  of 
Moses  and  the  sacred  writers. 

1.  Discoveries  in  Egypt. — We  know  that  Napoleon  I.  took 
with  him  in  his  expedition  to  Egypt  a  galaxy  of  scholars  to 
gather  all  that  was  possible  in  the  interest  of  science.  He 
made  important  discoveries;  they  became  innumerable  from 
the  time  that  the  indefatigable  ChampoUion  succeeded  in 
deciphering  the  hieroglyphics.  As  we  cannot  dwell  upon 
these  important  discoveries  which  followed  without  interrup- 
tion, let  us  content  ourselves  with  giving  an  idea  of  the  real 
service  they  rendered  Holy  Scripture. 

*  Thebaud,  Gentilism;  Brown;  Thein,  ch.  10;  A.  C.  Q.  iii.  73,  xvi. 
703;  M.  Ixxiv.  528;  C.  W.  xiii.  804,  xiv.  63. 


HISTORIC   VALUE    OF   THE   BIBLE.  131 

We  all  know,  for  example,  the  history  of  Abraham  and  that 
of  Joseph,  and  that  they  contain  innumerable  details  relating 
to  the  morals,  customs,  geography,  etc.,  of  the  time.  It  was 
these  details  which  formed  the  subject  of  the  attacks  of  Ger- 
man rationalists,  which  were  afterwards  translated  or  copied 
by  the  free-thinkers  of  France.  They  alleged  that  the  biblical 
accounts  contained  numerous  inaccuracies  and  errors,  denot- 
ing a  writer  very  imperfectly  acquainted  with  the  country  he 
described,  and,  above  all,  possessing  no  claim  to  the  divine 
inspiration  that  we  attribute  to  him. 

First.  The  manner  of  Abraham's  reception  at  the  court  of 
Pharao  seemed  very  improbable.  They  also  claimed  that 
the  sheep,  asses,  and  particularly  camels  offered  by  the  king 
of  Egypt  to  the  patriarch  were  animals  w^hich  had  never  been 
acclimated  in  this  country ;  that  horses,  on  the  contrary,  which 
were  not  enumerated  among  the  presents  of  Pharao,  were 
numerous  there.  Objections  of  a  like  nature  were  raised 
against  the  history  of  Joseph.  The  incident  of  the  cup  pre- 
sented to  the  king  by  the  cupbearer  was  absurd;  wine, 
they  insisted,  was  almost  unknown  in  Egypt;  the  ceremony 
of  clothing  Joseph  in  a  robe  of  silk,  as  well  as  the  chain  of 
gold  and  the  graven  stone  bestowed  upon  him  when  he  was 
raised  to  the  dignity  of  prime  minister,  were  unknown  at 
that  period. 

Now,  in  the  midst  of  this  general  assault  upon  the  Bible, 
the  modem  discoveries  of  Egyptologists  gave  the  most 
positive  denial  to  these  arrogant  claims  of  an  impious 
science,  and  completely  destroyed  this  scientific  scaffolding 
so  laboriously  erected.  The  numerous  paintings  in  the 
hypogea  of  Beni-Hussan,  contemporaneous  with  Abraham, 
represented  scenes  from  the  reception  of  strangers  recalling, 
incident  for  incident,  the  visit  of  Abraham  to  Pharao. 
According  to  the  inscriptions  on  the  paintings,  the  strangers, 
like  the  members  of  the  family  of  the  patriarch,  were  amu, 
that  is,  wandering  shepherds  of  Arabia  and  Palestine;  the 
name  of  their  chief,  Abschah  (father  of  the  sand),  bears 


132  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

some  analogy  to  that  of  Abraham  (father  of  the  multitude) ; 
the  physiognomy  and  the  costumes  are  purely  Semitic. 
Though  the  amu  offer  presents  as  a  mark  of  submission  and 
respect,  they  are  treated  as  persons  of  distinction;  the  recep- 
tion tendered  them  is  accompanied  with  all  the  pomp  of 
the  Egyptian  ceremonial.  Finally,  everything,  even  to  the 
motive  of  the  visit,  seems  to  be  identical:  it  was  a  famine, 
says  the  hieroglyphic  legend,  which  attracted  these  strangers 
to  the  land  of  Misraim. 

The  sculptures  and  the  paintings  of  Thebes,  explained  by 
the  most  accurate  authentic  texts,  show  that  asses  (aa), 
sheep  (sau),  and  oxen  (aua)  formed  the  greater  part  of  the 
riches  of  kings  and  princes;  some  of  the  monuments  also 
represent  camels;  horses,  on  the  contrary,  do  not  figure 
among  the  animals,  and  the  inscriptions  tell  us  that  they 
were  acclimated  in  Egypt  only  under  the  reign  of  the  shep- 
herd-kings, under  the  last  of  whom  Joseph  was  prime 
minister.  Hence  it  is  natural  that  they  should  not  be  men- 
tioned in  the  twelfth  dynasty,  the  period  when  Abraham 
went  to  Egypt. 

As  to  the  history  of  Joseph,  indirect  proofs  of  its  authen- 
ticity are  no  less  numerous  or  less  conclusive.  Wine  was 
perfectly  well  kno^vn  among  the  ancient  Egyptians.  Ar- 
tists of  Thebes  represent  the  ancient  inhabitants  of  the 
Nile  cultivating  the  vine,  using  and  abusing  wine,  and 
receiving  at  their  repasts  the  wine-cup  from  the  hands  of 
the  first  cup-bearer. 

Several  centuries  before  the  arrival  of  Joseph  the  Egyp- 
tians were  already  the  best  goldsmiths  and  engravers  in  the 
world.  Jewels  and  engraved  stones,  veritable  masterpieces 
in  every  respect,  wrought  in  Egyptian  manufactories  more 
than  three  thousand  years  ago,  may  be  counted  by  hun- 
dreds. All  the  museums  of  Europe  have  a  large  number 
of  magnificent  specimens.  Moreover,  the  description  given 
by  Moses  of  the  ceremony  of  Joseph's  elevation  to  the  rank 
of  prime  minister,  the  putting  a  robe  of  silk  upon  him, 


HISTORIC  VALUE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  133 

a  chain  of  gold  upon  his  neck,  a  ring  upon  his  finger,  the  offi- 
cial title  which  the  king  gave  him,  and  the  place  assigned 
him  in  the  second  chariot  in  the  royal  processions — all  this 
is  a  faithful  copy  of  the  numerous  sculptures  and  paintings 
representing  the  same  facts. 

And  so  it  is  with  the  account  of  the  dreams  of  the  cup- 
bearer and  the  baker,  of  the  interview  of  the  sons  of  Jacob 
with  Joseph,  of  the  special  etiquette  observed  at  the  feast 
which  was  served  them.  But  without  entering  into  details, 
which  we  could  multiply  indefinitely,  and  all  of  which  prove 
the  accuracy  of  Moses  even  in  the  smallest  particulars,  let 
us  consider  only  a  recent  discovery  connected  with  the  last 
years  of  the  Hebrews'  sojourn  in  Egypt,  which  furnishes 
the  bibUcal  exegete  authentic  and  unexpected  information. 

A  mummy  recently  discovered  in  a  state  of  preservation 
proved  to  be  Ramses  II.,  the  Greek  Sesostris,  who  inaugu- 
rated the  persecution  of  the  Hebrews.  To  satisfy  his  mania 
for  building  as  well  as  his  hatred  of  the  sons  of  Israel  he 
forced  them  to  build  the  two  cities  in  the  land  of  Gessen, 
Rameses  and  Pithom.  The  Bible  gives  us  a  picture  of  the 
sufferings  of  Israel;  under  the  rod  of  the  Egyptian  overseers 
the  Hebrews  were  forced  to  labor  without  respite,  making 
bricks  and  baking  them  in  the  sun.  The  pictures  of  the 
eighteenth  dynasty  confirm  the  accuracy  of  the  biblical 
account  in  every  point;  even  the  mode  of  manufacturing 
the  brick  described  in  the  papyrus  containing  the  reports 
of  the  overseers  is  identical  with  that  given  in  the  Bible. 

But  the  location  of  the  two  cities  built  by  the  Hebrews 
was  unknown;  the  texts  gave  only  a  vague  description 
of  Rameses;  Pithom  was  commemorated  in  no  monu- 
ment so  far  discovered.  Behold,  this  last  village  has  risen 
out  of  the  sand  which  so  long  covered  its  vast  ruins. 

In  the  month  of  February,  1883,  Naville  discovered 
near  Maskhuta,  east  of  the  Delta,  an  immense  block  of 
granite  representing  a  Pharao  seated  between  the  god  Ra 
and  the  god  Tum.    This  Pharao  was  no  other  than  the 


134  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

Ramses  II.  whose  name  occurs  six  times  in  the  inscription 
of  the  monument.  The  ruins  in  which  the  Swiss  Egypt- 
ologist found  the  sculpture  were  composed  of  a  mass  of 
sun-baked  brick  mixed  with  straw  and  reeds,  and  stamped 
with  the  cartouche  of  Ramses.  They  were  surrounded  by  a 
good-sized  wall,  also  of  brick,  enclosing  an  area  of  a  hundred 
acres.  Other  sculptures  soon  came  to  light,  all  bearing,  with 
the  bibUcal  name  of  Pithom,  the  cartouche  of  Pharao  the 
persecutor.     No  fragment  anterior  to  this  reign  was  found. 

This  important  discovery,  while  confirming  the  truth  of 
the  Mosaic  text,  enables  us  also  to  determine  with  suffi- 
cient satisfaction  the  limits  of  the  land  of  Gessen^  and  to 
trace  with  greater  precision  the  route  of  the  Exodus. 

This  accuracy  of  local  coloring  has  become  so  manifest 
that  the  most  hostile  savants,  finding  themselves  every- 
where contradicted  by  new  discoveries,  are  forced  to  ac- 
knowledge themselves  defeated.^  Thus  when,  in  1868, 
Ebers,  the  most  celebrated  Egyptologist  of  Germany,  pub- 
lished, despite  the  protestations  of  fellow  rationalists,  his  first 
volume  on  Egypt  and  the  books  of  Moses,  the  evidence  of 
facts  forced  from  him  this  significant  avowal:  ^'It  is  with 
reluctance  that  I  pubhsh  this  laborious  work.  I  hope  no 
doubt  to  win  with  it  the  good-will  of  a  certain  number  of 
biblical  adherents,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  I  am  well  aware 
that  I  shall  subject  myself  to  severe  criticism.  I  offer 
despite  myself,  so  to  speak,  and  yet  willingly,  to  those  who 
would  close  the  Scriptures  to  open  criticism,  much  which 
will  gratify  them,  for  I  demonstrate  that  the  history  of  Joseph 
particularly,  even  in  the  smallest  details,  portrays  with  great 
exactness  the  state  of  ancient  Egypt.'' 

2.  Discoveries  in  Assyria  and  Chaldea. — Notwith- 
standing the  amount  and  variety  of  information  furnished 
by  ancient  Egyptian  monuments,  Egyptology  has  not  ful- 
filled all  that  it  promised  at  the  beginning.  It  has  hardly 
given   us  more   than   merely  indirect  confirmation   of  the 

^  A.  E.  R.,  Nov.  1902. 


HISTORIC   VALUE    OF   THE    BIBLE.  135 

truth  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures.  With  Assyrian  archaeology 
the  results  are  quite  otherwise:  here  direct  proofs  are  most 
numerous.  The  texts  and  sculptures  of  the  ruins  of  Ninive 
and  Babylon  not  only  confirm  the  inspired  writings,  but 
in  many  places  explain  them  and  supply  omissions.^ 

About  the  time  that  the  key  to  the  hieroglyphic  writing 
was  discovered  scholars  began  to  decipher  cuneiform  writ- 
ing, that  is,  the  wedge-  or  nail-shaped  inscriptions:  the  tri- 
angular steel  used  in  forming  the  characters  produced  a 
mark  resembling  a  wedge  or  nail.  The  monuments  of 
Assyria  were  covered  with  this  writing;  the  Assyrian  mon- 
archs  were  in  the  habit  of  engraving  their  exploits  on  tab- 
lets, prisms,  or  cylinders,  which  were  placed  in  the  founda- 
tions of  large  edifices,  on  the  marbles  which  adorned  the 
large  halls  of  the  temples  and  palaces,  or  behind  the  bas- 
reliefs  which  ornamented  the  porticos.  The  richest  source 
of  it,  however,  consists  of  the  numerous  libraries  discov- 
ered in  Chaldea,  Assyria,  and  particularly  at  Ninive.  In 
this  city  was  discovered,  besides  the  library  of  the  palace 
of  Sennacherib,  that  of  the  palace  of  Assurbanipal,  contain- 
ing about  ten  thousand  cuneiform  tablets,  that  is,  an  almost 
complete  treasury  of  the  literature  of  the  period:  theology, 
astronomy  or  astrology,  history  political  and  natural,  geog- 
raphy, and  grammar.  The  books  of  the  hbraries  consisted 
of  flat,  square  tablets  of  clay,  covered  on  both  sides  with 
fine,  closely  written  cuneiform  characters,  which  were  set 
by  a  process  of  baking  or  firing.  Some  of  the  books  con- 
sisted of  more  than  a  hundred  tablets,  labelled  and  num- 
bered in  the  most  perfect  order.  It  is  true  that  the  library, 
particularly  of  Assurbanipal,  was  seriously  injured  in  the 
palace  fire  and,  later,  by  the  inclemency  of  the  seasons 
and  the  rapacity  of  the  Arabs;  but  a  good  portion  of  it 
still  remains  and  forms  one  of  the  chief  possessions  of  the 
British  Museum  in  London. 

We  are  indebted  for  these  treasures  to  the  efforts  of  Mr. 

^  See  Rogers,  History  of  Babylonia. 


136  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

Layard  in  1850,  and  to  those  of  Mr.  George  Smith  in  1873 
and  1875.  In  the  beginning  of  April,  1882,  Hormuzd  Rassam 
enriched  the  British  Museum  with  five  thousand  new  tablets 
which  he  found  at  Abou-Habba,  the  Sipharnaim  of  the 
Bible.  The  Louvre  also  acquired  in  1882  a  large  collec- 
tion of  cuneiform  inscriptions.  At  the  same  time  M.  de 
Sarzec,  French  consul  at  Bassorah,  discovered  at  a  four 
days'  journey  from  this  locality  ruins  covering  a  space  of 
from  six  to  seven  kilometres,  and  containing  a  large  num- 
ber of  cylinders  and  tablets  as  well  as  the  remains  of  a 
temple  formerly  ornamented  with  greenstone  statues  of 
great  antiquity.  These  figures  are  the  first  specimens  of 
real  Chaldean  statuary. 

Here  are  a  few  of  the  remarkable  results  of  Chaldean- 
Assyrian  discoveries  relating  to  biblical  exegesis. 

The  Assyrian  bas-rehefs  frequently  reproduce  the  tree  of 
life;  an  ancient  Babylonian  cylinder  represents  the  tempta- 
tion of  Adam  and  Eve;  the  serpent,  which  is  seen  behind 
the  woman,  does  not  crawl,  but  stands  erect.  Mr.  George 
Smith  found  a  cuneiform  tablet  anterior  to  Moses,  on  which 
were  inscribed  all  the  principal  events  of  the  deluge: 
the  corruption  of  the  world;  the  divine  command  to  build 
the  ark;  the  judgment  of  God  against  sinners;  the  dimen- 
sions of  the  ark,  the  calking,  the  command  to  preserve 
certain  living  creatures;  the  entrance  into  the  ark;  the 
description  of  the  deluge;  the  opening  of  the  window;  the 
sending  forth  of  the  bird;  the  oblation  of  sacrifice;  the 
blessing  of  God  and  the  covenant  with  Him.  Another 
account  of  the  same  event  has  just  been  discovered  by  M. 
Hormuzd  Rassam.  This  version  is  not  of  Assyrian  origin 
hke  the  first,  but  Chaldean,  yet  it  is  exactly  the  same  and 
supplies  several  omissions. 

Shapeless  ruins,  170  metres  in  circumference  and  46  in 
height,  were  found  recently  twelve  miles  from  Hillah,  an 
ancient  town  of  Babylon;  they  consisted  of  bricks  partially 
vitrified  by  fire,  and    have   proved  to  be  the    remains  of 


HISTORIC  VALUE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  137 

Birs-Nimmd.  The  labors  of  Mr.  Oppert  establish  be- 
yond doubt  that  they  are  the  ruins  of  the  Tower  of  Babel. 
The  inscriptions  of  Sargon,  on  the  other  hand,  tell  us  the 
material  employed  in  its  construction:  bricks  baked  in 
the  fire,  and  slime  for  mortar.  Is  not  this  precisely  what 
the  Bible  says?  '^When  they  removed  from  the  East,  they 
found  a  plain  in  the  land  of  Sennaar,  and  dwelt  in  it.  And 
each  one  said  to  his  neighbor:  Come,  let  us  make  bricks, 
and  bake  them  with  fire.  And  they  had  bricks  instead  of 
stones,  and  slime  instead  of  mortar."     (Gen.  xi.  3.) 

The  Babylonian  traditions  of  the  Tower  of  Babel  and  the 
confusion  of  tongues  are  so  strikingly  like  the  biblical  report 
that  certain  modern  rationalists  have  thought  that  the  legend 
''could  not  be  very  old."  But  in  his  inscriptions  Nabucho- 
donosor,  who  rebuilt  the  monument,  speaks  of  the  first  tower 
"as  of  great  antiquity." 

By  reading,  with  the  light  of  Assyrian  discoveries,  the 
books  of  the  Old  Testament  where  the  people  of  God  come 
before  us  in  their  relations  with  the  kings  of  Ninive  and 
Babylon,  we  shall  also  find  numerous  and  incontestable 
proofs  of  biblical  truth;  but  we  can  give  only  a  few  in- 
stances. The  enemies  of  the  Bible  question  the  Babylonian 
captivity  of  Manasses,  king  of  Juda,  mentioned  in  the 
Book  of  Chronicles,  and  the  historic  existence  of  Sargon, 
king  of  Assyria,  mentioned  by  Isaias.  Thanks  to  recent 
discoveries  made  by  Assyriologists,  such  doubts  can  no 
longer  be  entertained.  As  regards  Sargon,  for  instance,  they 
have  produced  inscriptions  sufficiently  developed  to  be  called 
by  Assyriologists  ''The  Fasti  of  Sargon."  Moreover,  an 
effigy  of  the  great  monarch  himself  is  now  to  be  seen  at  the 
Louvre  in  Paris. 

The  Book  of  Daniel,  says  the  Assyrian  scholar  Menant, 
records  the  features  of  the  Chaldean  civihzation  under  King 
Nabuchodonosor  with  an  exactness  which  an  apocryphal 
or  fraudulent  writer  could  never  have  attained. 

It  was  also  stated  that  the  Book  of  Esther  was  written 


138  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

in  the  year  160  B.C.,  after  the  victories  of  Judas  Machabeus, 
by  a  writer  absolutely  ignorant  of  Persia.  Now  the  exca- 
vations made  by  Dieulafoy  give  the  lie  to  all  such  state- 
ments. In  a  conference  which  he  gave  in  1888,  a  resume  of 
which  was  given  by  M.  Darmesteter  in  the  Journal  asiatique, 
he  showed  that  ^'  the  objections  accumulated  by  a  rational- 
istic exegesis  against  the  authenticity  of  the  Bible  are  based 
chiefly  on  an  imperfect  conception  of  Persian  life.  The 
details  which  were  condemned  as  unreasonable  and  improb- 
able now  prove,  on  the  contrary,  that  the  writer  possessed 
an  excellent  knowledge  of  the  customs  of  the  court  of  Susa.'' 
It  is  only  necessary  to  examine  the  plan  of  the  royal  palace 
brought  to  light  by  the  excavations  of  M.  Dieulafoy  to  see 
how  accurate  are  certain  details  of  the  edifice  given  by  the 
author  of  the  Book  of  Esther.  The  writer's  description  is 
evidently  based  upon  an  actual  view  of  this  monument,  de- 
stroyed at  the  end  of  the  third  century  B.C. 

The  study  of  the  Egyptian  and  Assyrian  languages,  com- 
pared with  the  text  of  the  Bible,  also  affords  proofs  in  favor 
of  Scripture  quite  as  conclusive  as  those  of  archaeological 
discoveries.  We  find  in  the  Pentateuch,  and  there  only,  a 
large  number  of  Egyptian  words,  which  prove  how  familiar 
its  author  was  with  the  Egyptian  language.  The  tradition 
which  attributes  the  work  to  Moses  is  all  that  satisfactorily 
explains  this  phenomenon.     Let  us  give  a  few  examples. 

Pentateuch.  Egyptian. 
Tebah  (the  basket  in  which  Moses  was  exposed  on 

the  Nile) Tba. 

Ses  (the  linen  robe  of  Joseph,  the  prime  minister)  / .  Ses. 

Hartum  (Pharao's  interpreters) Hartum. 

Qas  (straw  used  in  the  bricks) Qas. 

Seneh  (the  burning  bush) Sent. 

Even  the  accuracy  of  the  proper  names  in  the  Bible  is 
confirmed  by  the  contemporary  monuments  of  Assyria  and 


HISTORIC  VALtTE  OF   THE   BIBLE.  139 

Egypt.  This  is  the  more  remarkable  that  the  Bible  is  the  only 
book  which  transmits  the  original  orthography  of  these  proper 
names;  in  all  other  books  extra-biblical,  even  the  most 
ancient,  it  is  frequently  impossible  to  identify  them. 

^  ^^  Cuneiform  or  Hieroglyphic 

Biblical  JNames.  Texts. 

Madai  (Media) Madai 

Javan  (Ionia) Javanu. 

Kus  (Ethiopia) < 

Put  (Syria) Put. 

Nemrod Nemerad. 

Babel  (Confusion) Babel. 

Jerusalem Oursalimmi. 

Sennacherib Sin-Akhi-irib. 

Manasses Minasi. 

Pharao Per-aa. 

Putiphar Petiphra. 

. ,  f  Abram  or  Abu-Rama  (As- 

Abram <  .      .       ,  .  r  .^ 

I     Syrian  form),  great  latner. 

Chanaan Kanana. 

Accad  (city  of  Sennaar) Akkad. 

Assur    ^ Assur. 

Elam     V  Children  of  Sem Ham. 

Aram   J   Aramu. 

The  lists  of  the  names  of  countries  in  the  inscriptions  of 
Thothmes  III.  at  Karnak  contain  a  large  number  of  cities 
and  localities  mentioned  in  the  Bible. 

We  should  never  conclude  if  we  were  to  mention  all  the 
testimony  which  modern  discoveries  in  Egypt,  Assyria,  and 
Palestine  bear  to  the  absolute  truth  of  the  Scriptures. 

Conclusion. — We  cannot  better  conclude  this  part  of  our 
work  relating  to  the  authority  of  the  Pentateuch  than  by 
quoting  a  beautiful  page  from  the  Abbe  Darras' "  History  of  the 
Church/'  vol.  III.:  ^'Will  these  frequent  discomfitures  of  in- 


140  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS, 

credulous  exegetes  make  future  rationalists  more  cautious? 
Would  we  might  hope  so!  But  as  we  glance  at  the  past  and 
count  all  the  adversaries  of  the  Scriptures  who  have  succes- 
sively come  forward  to  hurl  their  grain  of  sand  against  the 
immutable  rock  of  the  divine  word,  we  have  told  ourselves  that 
these  revolts  of  the  human  mind  will  never  cease.  Hence,  des- 
pite so  many  impotent  efforts  other  arms  will  be  raised  again; 
despite  so  many  failures,  other  assailants  will  rise  in  their 
turn;  the  struggle  will  last  until  the  end  of  time.  But  God, 
who  reserved  for  our  day  witnesses  buried  in  oblivion  for 
more  than  three  thousand  years,  will  raise  up  others  in  ages 
to  come.  What  rich  harvests,  still  unknown,  are  to  be 
reaped  in  the  domain  of  the  past!  What  treasures,  now 
buried  under  the  ruins  of  extinct  civilizations,  the  future 
will  see  exhumed  at  the  hour  marked  for  the  triumph  of  truth 
and  biblical  faith! 

''Even  in  our  own  day  have  w^e  not  found  that  every 
discovery  so  laboriously  accomplished  in  all  the  branches  of 
human  science  is  a  most  striking  and  unexpected  confirma- 
tion of  the  most  widely  controverted  texts  of  Sacred  Scripture? 
And  so  it  has  been  from  the  time  of  Porphyrins  to  the  present 
day.  Now  let  the  most  perfect  work  of  genius  be  sub- 
mitted to  the  investigation,  to  the  severe  and  partial  criticism 
which  the  Bible  has  endured,  and  that  for  centuries;  where 
is  the  Plato,  the  Aristotle,  the  Tacitus,  the  Bossuet  of  whom 
one  single  work  would  remain  entire?  And  yet  the  Bible 
stands  triumphant  and  immortal.  According  as  devastating 
hands  dig  about  the  foundations  of  the  edifice  to  destroy  it, 
they  find  new  and  ever-indestructible  masonry  support- 
ing it. 

"Rationalists,  you  do  not  believe  in  miracles;  for  twenty 
centuries  you  have  followed  one  another  in  legions  to  destroy 
a  book  written  long  ago  by  a  few  Hebrews  in  a  small  province 
of  Asia.  All  human  passions  have  been  allied  with  you  in 
this  war.  So  many  books  have  been  destroyed,  and  yet  you 
could  not  destroy  this  one:  in  truth  it  is  a  miracle/^ 


HISTORIC   VALUE    OF   THE   BIBLE.  141 


ART.   III.— AUTHORITY  OF  THE  GOSPELS.* 

Universal  credence  would  be  willingly  given  to  our 
inspired  books  if,  instead  of  the  life  of  the  Saviour  and  the 
establishment  of  Christianity,  they  told  us  of  the  deeds  and 
exploits  of  a  great  conqueror  or  of  one  of  those  political 
revolutions  upsetting  whole  nations.  But  they  acquaint  us 
with  the  origin  of  a  religion  which  demands  the  sacrifice  of 
many  prejudices  and  passions  and  the  constant  practice  of 
precepts  opposed  to  the  worst  instincts  of  nature.  Hence  it 
is  not  surprising  that  every  effort  has  been  made  to  de- 
stroy this  religion.  Now  the  very  foundation  of  Christian- 
ity will  be  shattered  if  the  quality  of  historical  certainty  can 
be  removed  from  those  documents  which  record  the  life, 
miracles,  death,  and  resurrection  of  Christ  and  the  founding 
of  the  Church.  It  is,  therefore,  of  capital  importance  to 
establish  upon  solid  grounds  the  historical  authority  of  these 
documents  already  so  venerable  by  their  age. 

Let  us  recall  w^hat  we  have  already  said  in  regard  to  the 
point  of  view  from  which  we  are  considering  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures, and  the  qualities  required  to  render  the  authority  of 
a  historical  document  full  and  complete. 

I.  Authenticity. 

The  authenticity  of  the  writings  of  the  New  Testament, 
upon  which  the  full  light  of  criticism  has  been  concentrated, 
is  now  hardly  disputed.  Reus,  Holzman,  Schenkel,  Reville, 
Michel  Nicolas  recognize  the  historical  authority  of  the 
gospels  and  admit  that  they  were  written  in  the  first  century 
of  the  Christian  era.  "We  consider  ourselves  justified,'' 
saysTischendorf, ''in  placing  at  the  end  of  the  first  century 
not  the  birth  or  composition  of  the  gospels,  but  their  union 
into  a  canonical  body  of  books/'    In  regard  to  the  epistles 

*  Introductions  by  Breen,  Dixon,  McDevitt,  Gigot,  Bumet,  Why, 
etc.,  ch.  15-19;  D.  R.,  Apr.  '93,  p.  420,  New  Ser.  xxiv.  357;  C.  W. 
xlviii.  376,  Ivii.  593;  M.,  Sept.,  Oct.  '84,  Jan.  '85. 


142  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

of  St.  Paul  Renan  affirms  that  the  full  light  of  history 
shines  upon  the  time  of  St.  Paul's  preaching,  which,  without 
doubt,  was  between  the  fifteenth  and  the  thirty-second  year 
after  the  Passion  of  Jesus.  He  says:  "The  epistles  of  this 
apostle  have  an  absolute  authenticity."  Again:  "It  is 
beyond  all  doubt  that  the  Acts  were  written  by  the  author  of 
the  third  gospel,  of  which  they  are  a  continuation. .  .  .  The 
author  is  a  companion  of  St.  Paul." 

Thesis. — The  Gospels  were  Written  in   the  First    Century  of 

the    Christian  Era,  by  the  Authors  whose  Names  they  Bear, 

that  is,  by  the  Apostles  or  their  Immediate  Disciples. 

First  Argument, — It  is  prescription.  Possession  is  equal 
to  a  title  until  the  claim  is  disproved.  Now  all  Christians, 
Catholic  or  heretical,  have  always  regarded,  and  still  regard, 
the  gospels  as  authentic,  and  on  this  point  they  are  in 
peaceful  and  perpetual  possession.  To  dispossess  them  it  is 
necessary  to  prove  that  the  possession  is  illegal,  and  to  say 
when  and  by  whom  the  assumption  was  made.  "We 
Christians,"  says  M.  de  Broglie,  "are  in  the  position  of  a 
proprietor  who  knows  from  whom  he  holds  his  possessions, 
who  is  sure  of  the  validity  of  his  title,  and  who  is  obliged 
to  examine  the  claims  of  contestants  only  as  far  as  it  is 
necessary  to  defend  his  own."  Now,  despite  all  the  efforts 
of  infidelity,  we  find  no  opposition  on  this  capital  point, 
except  a  few  weak  objections,  the  futility  of  which  we  shall 
see  later  on.  The  authenticity  of  the  gospels,  therefore, 
remains  established  until  its  adversaries  prove  the  contrary. 
But  this  they  cannot  do,  for  the  proofs  which  we  are  about 
to  demonstrate  are  irrefutable. 

Second  Argument. — ^The  positive  proofs  in  favor  of  this 
authenticity  are  so  numerous  and  so  uniform  that  they 
defy  contradiction.     We  have,  in  fact,  on  this  point : 

a.  The  unanimous  accord  of  all  Christian  authors,  not 
only  of  our  day,  but  even  of  the  first  centuries.  Among 
the  Apostolic  Fathers,  that  is,  the  immediate  disciples  of  the 


HISTORIC   VALUE   OF   THE    BIBLE.  143 

apostles,  we  find  quotations  from  the  gospels.^  St.  Ignatius  of 
Antioch,  the  disciple  of  St.  John,  says  in  one  of  his  letters 
(ad  Philad.  2,  5):  ''I  have  recourse  to  the  Gospel  as  to 
Christ  corporally  present,  and  to  the  apostles  [that  is,  to 
the  epistles]  as  to  the  teaching  of  the  present  Church."  St. 
Papias,  another  disciple  of  St.  John,  gives  precise  informa- 
tion in  regard  to  the  writings  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark, 
whom  he  designates  by  name.  In  the  second  century  St. 
Justin  testifies  that  in  his  time  the  memoirs  of  the  apostles, 
which  we  call  gospels,  were  read  in  the  assemblies  of  the 
Christians;  he  knows  that  these  memoirs  were  written  by 
the  apostles  and  apostolic  men  (that  is,  by  the  apostles 
Matthew  and  John,  and  by  apostolic  men,  Mark  and  Luke) . 
The  first  to  cite  the  names  of  the  four  evangelists  is 
St.  Irenseus,  the  disciple  of  St.  Polycarp,  St.  John's  disciple; 
he  came  from  Asia  Minor  to  Gaul  and  was  raised  to  the 
episcopal  see  of  Lyons,  where  he  died  a  martyr  in  202.  In 
his  works  he  refers  so  frequently  to  the  gospels  that  we 
could  almost  reconstruct  the  entire  gospel  narrative  with 
the  texts  he  quotes.  He  has  left  an  analysis  of  the  Gospel 
of  St.  Luke  corresponding  point  for  point  with  the  book 
we  possess  bearing  this  name.  Origen,  in  Egypt,  and  Ter- 
tullian,  in  Africa,  afford  us  formal  and  almost  equally  ancient 
testimony  in  favor  of  the  authenticity  of  the  gospels.  ^ 

h.  The  accord  of  the  heretics  of  the  early  centuries.  The 
Gnostics  knew  our  gospels  and  made  frequent  use  of  them. 
Marcion  falsified  the  Gospel  of  St.  Luke  to  adapt  it  to  his 

^  We  have  a  certain  number  of  writings  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers 
which  are  absolutely  and  incontestably  authentic.  Such  are  the 
celebrated  letter  to  the  Corinthians  by  St.  Clement,  a  contemporary  of 
St.  Peter;  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  the  faithful  companion  and  friend 
of  St.  Paul;  The  Pastor  by  Hermas;  seven  letters  of  St.  Ignatius  of 
Antioch;  the  letter  of  St.  Polycarp  to  the  Philippians;  the  letter  to 
Diognetes;  and  the  Fragments  of  Papias. 

2 1.  E.  R.,  Apr.,  May,  July  1900.  In  Pere  Didon's  beautiful  work, 
Jesus  Christ,  another  proof  is  taken  from  the  different  versions  of  the 
gospels  put  forth  in  the  very  earliest  days  of  Christianity  (pp.  xii., 
xxvii.,  Engl.  ed.). 


144  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

erroneous  doctrines.  In  fact  the  authenticity  of  the  gospels 
was  so  incontestable  that  none  of  these  heretics  dreamed 
of  disputing  it. 

c.  The  agreement  of  pagans  themselves,  such  as  Celsus 
in  the  second  century,  Porphyrins  in  the  third,  Julian  the 
Apostate  in  the  fourth.  These  inveterate  and  astute  ene- 
mies of  the  Christian  religion  tried,  it  is  true,  to  find  in  the 
gospels  objections  to  their  divinity,  but  they  never  at- 
tempted to  assail  the  authenticity  of  the  books.  Yet  if  it 
had  been  possible  they  certainly  would  have  had  recourse 
to  this  means,  for  it  was  evidently  the  shortest  and  most 
efficacious  way  of  combating  the  Church  of  Christ. 

Third  Argument. — The  gospels  bear  all  the  intrinsic 
marks  of  authenticity.  So  far  from  finding  in  them  any- 
thing contrary  to  the  laws,  usages,  institutions,  language, 
customs,  characters,  tastes,  prejudices,  in  a  word,  to  the 
social  and  religious  state  of  Judea  at  that  time,  it  is 
portrayed  with  such  scrupulous  accuracy  and  precise  detail 
that  only  ocular  witnesses  could  have  known  and  written 
the  events  described.  The  same  may  be  said  of  all  that 
relates  to  the  history,  the  geography,  the  topography,  the 
numismatics  of  the  period.  The  English  writers  Lardner  and 
Paley,  particularly,  have  demonstrated  that  the  conformity 
of  the  gospels  to  the  state  of  Roman  society  as  we  know  it 
in  the  time  of  Augustus  is,  even  in  the  smallest  details,  most 
remarkable.  Now  it  would  have  been  absolutely  impossible 
for  a  later  writer  not  to  err,  particularly  upon  certain 
very  complicated  and  obscure  points  of  the  first  century. 
It  is  evident  from  a  number  of  passages  that  the  Jews  to 
whom  St.  Matthew  addresses  his  gospel  lived  in  Jerusalem 
before  its  ruin.  The  Jerusalem  of  Agrippa  is  so  vividly 
portrayed  in  the  same  gospel  that  rationalists  do  not  venture 
to  date  its  composition  beyond  the  years  immediately  fol- 
lowing the  destruction  of  the  holy  city;  otherwise  how 
could  the  vanished  city  have  left  so  fresh  a  memory?  When 
these  critics,  obstinate  enemies  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  place 


HISTORIC  VALUE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  145 

the  composition  of  the  first  gospel  after  the  year  70,  it  is  only 
because  it  contains  the  prophecy  of  the  ruin  of  Jerusalem  and 
of  the  Temple:  from  their  standpoint  prophecy  being  impos- 
sible, they  must  declare  it  to  have  been  written  after  the  event. 

Fourth  Argument. — ^The  preceding  proofs  more  than 
suffice  to  establish  decisively  the  authenticity  of  the  gospels. 
We  may  go  still  further,  however,  and  demonstrate  that  it  is 
even  impossible  for  these  books  to  be  other  than  authentic. 
In  fact  the  proofs  cited  above  show  that  they  were  imiver- 
sally  recognized  as  authentic  at  the  beginning  of  the  second 
and  even  in  the  first  century.  If,  therefore,  there  was  any 
imposture,  it  must  necessarily  have  been  perpetrated  in 
the  lifetime  of  the  apostles,  or  a  short  time  after  their  death. 
These  two  hypotheses  are  equally  inadmissible,  for  any- 
thing of  the  kind  would  have  encountered  violent  opposition 
from  the  apostles,  so  careful  to  preserve  the  faith  in  all  its 
purity,  or  at  least  from  their  immediate  disciples,  as  well  as 
from  pagans  and  heretics  interested  in  revealing  the  im- 
posture. Now  nothing  of  the  kind  was  produced.  The 
faithful  never  hesitated  to  receive  these  writings  as  coming 
from  the  apostles;  on  the  contrary,  when  the  apocryphal 
gospels  appeared  they  were  immediately  repudiated  by 
the  most  eminent  Christian  doctors. 

Conclusion. — These  arguments,  as  convincing  and  de- 
cisive as  history  can  possibly  furnish,  render  the  authenticity 
of  the  gospels  incontestable.  Renan  himself  is  finally 
forced  by  German  science  to  acknowledge  as  much.  "On 
the  whole,"  he  says,  "I  admit  that  the  four  canonical  gos- 
pels are  authentic.  In  my  opinion  they  all  date  from  the 
first  century  and  they  are  nearly  all  written  by  the  authors 
to  whom  they  are  attributed."  Nearly  all — rather  a  strange 
expression  in  a  question  requiring  a  simple  yes  or  no.  But 
some  allowance  must  be  made  for  the  awkward  constraint 
of  such  an  acknowledgment.^ 

^  See  the  Abbe  Fouard's  work,  "  St.  Peter  and  the  First  Years  of 
Christianity/'  ch.  12;  also  Didon,  1.  c. 


146  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

II.  Integrity  of  the  Gospels. 

First  Argument. — To  prove  this  integrity  we  may  be 
satisfied  with  quoting  the  following  from  the  learned  polyglot 
Card.  Wiseman:  ''Although  every  attainable  source  has  been 
exhausted;  although  the  Fathers  of  every  age  have  gleaned 
for  their  readings;  although  the  versions  of  every  nation, 
Arabic,  Syriac,  Coptic,  Armenian,  and  Ethiopian,  have 
been  ransacked  for  their  renderings;  although  manuscripts 
of  every  age  from  the  sixteenth  upwards  to  the  third,  and  of 
every  country,  have  been  again  and  again  visited  by  indus- 
trious swarms  to  rifle  them  of  their  treasures;  although, 
having  exhausted  the  stores  of  the  West,  critics  have 
travelled  like  naturalists  into  distant  lands  to  discover  new 
specimens — have  visited,  like  Scholz  or  Sebastiani,  the 
recesses  of  Momit  Athos,  or  the  unexplored  libraries  of  the 
Egyptian  and  Syrian  deserts — yet  nothing  has  been  dis- 
covered, no,  not  one  single  various  reading,  which  can  throw 
doubt  upon  any  passage  before  considered  certain  or  de- 
cisive in  favor  of  any  important  doctrine."  ^ 

We  have  about  five  hundred  ancient  MSS.  of  the  gospels, 
dating  from  the  time  of  Constantine  to  the  sixteenth  century; 
the  principal  ?je  the  Codex  Vaticanus,  the  Alexandrine,  the 
palimpsest  of  St.  Ephrem  in  the  National  Library  of  Paris, 
and  the  Codex  Sinaiticus.  Now  all  these  MSS.,  even  the 
most  ancient,  substantially  agree.  They  agree  also  with  the 
numerous  quotations  made  by  the  Fathers  and  the  Doctors 
of  the  Church.  Therefore  they  have  remained  as  they  were 
originally  written. 

We  have  seen  that  the  result  of  the  studies  made  con- 
cerning the  MSS.  of  the  Old  Testament  is  absolutely  the 
same;  hence  the  enemies  of  Christianity  are  forced  to  ac- 
knowledge their  defeat. 

Second  Argument. — Such  alteration,  moreover,  would 
have  been  impossible  in  books  so  widely  known  and  re- 

*  Science  and  Rev.  Rel.,  1.  10. 


HISTORIC   VALUE    OF  THE   BIBLE.  147 

spected  from  the  beginning.  In  fact,  when  could  it  have 
taken  place?  In  the  time  of  the  apostles?  They  would 
not  have  permitted  it.  After  their  death?  Their  disciples 
would  have  perceived  it  and  would  have  protested  against  it. 
A  little  later?  The  copies  of  these  writings  were  so  numerous 
and  such  a  great  check  one  upon  the  other  that  any  alteration 
would  have  excited  violent  protest  on  the  part  of  the  Chris- 
tians, on  the  part  of  heretics,  or,  finally,  on  the  part  of  Jews 
and  pagans.  Now  nothing  of  the  kind  took  place.  "At 
the  present  day,'^  says  August  Nicolas,  "it  would  be  im- 
possible to  alter  the  Holy  Scriptures,  for  they  are  in  the  hands 
of  all  Catholics,  of  the  pope,  bishops,  priests  and  laity;  they 
are  in  the  hands  of  heretics  and  Jews;  they  are  in  the  hands 
of  unbelievers :  and  one  or  other  of  these  would  be  sure  to 
brand  the  imposture  as  soon  as  it  appeared.  Now  what 
is  impossible  to-day,  because  of  this  triple  rank  of  incorrup- 
tible surveillants,  has  always  been  impossible  for  the  same 
reason.'' 

Observation. — No  doubt  numerous  variants  are  found 
in  the  different  MSS.  of  the  New  Testament,  but  they  prove 
absolutely  nothing  against  the  integrity  of  the  book.  We 
know  that  the  same  thing  occurs  and  must  occur  in  all  the 
works  which  have  come  down  to  us  from  antiquity.  The 
variants  in  the  works  of  Horace  alone  have  furnished  matter 
for  three  volumes.  There  could  not  but  be  variants  in  the 
gospels,  for  no  work  has  been,  at  all  times  and  in  all  places, 
more  copied,  read,  translated,  and  commentated.  God 
was  not  obliged  to  work  a  perpetual  and  striking  miracle  to 
preserve  the  gospels  from  slight  changes  in  the  text  which 
in  no  way  affected  the  doctrine.  We  may  even  say  that 
these  numerous  variants,  far  from  proving  anything  against 
the  integrity  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  only  confirm  it  the  more. 
As  they  leave  the  essential  parts  of  each  phrase  intact,  it  is 
clear  that  they  are  only  the  mistakes  of  copyists  and  trans- 
lators, and  that  the  idea  of  a  substantial  alteration  never, 
occurred  to  any  one. 


148  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

Conclusion. — The  evangelical  books  have  never  been 
altered;  it  was  not  even  possible  to  alter  them.  The  fact  of 
their  integrity,  therefore,  is  incontestable. 

III.  Truthfulness  of  the  Gospels. 

Let  us  prove  now  that  the  authors  of  the  gospels  (a)  could 
not  be  deceived  in  regard  to  the  events  which  they  relate; 
(b)  that  they  did  not  wish  to  deceive;  (c)  that  even  had  they 
wished  to  deceive  they  could  not  do  so;  and  we  shall  thus 
establish  the  incontestable  accuracy  of  their  narrations. 

A.  These  Writers  could  not  be  Deceived,  for  they 
relate  only  what  they  saw  or  learned  from  eye-witnesses 
worthy  of  belief.  They  wrote,  moreover,  of  sensible,  material, 
recent  facts  accomplished  in  the  full  light  of  day,  frequently 
in  the  presence  of  a  large  multitude,  and  even  of  the  enemies 
of  Jesus,  who,  without  contesting  what  He  did,  endeavored 
only  to  explain  it  by  means  of  the  intervention  of  the  Evil 
One.  They  were  facts  of  capital  importance  to  the  institu- 
tions and  the  religion  of  the  Jewish  people,  and  consequently 
of  vital  interest  to  them;  finally,  they  were  frequently  ex- 
traordinary and  marvellous,  and  therefore  fitted  to  excite 
attention.  We  certainly  cannot  say  that  the  authors  of 
the  gospels  were,  all  four  at  the  same  time,  blind  and  deaf  or 
the  victims  of  illusion.  If  we  did,  we  should  have  to  say 
the  same  of  innumerable  others,  even  among  the  enemies  of 
Jesus,  for  they  also  admitted,  without  protest,  the  evangelical 
narratives.  It  is  certain,  therefore,  that  these  writers  could 
not  have  been  deceived  in  regard  to  what  they  have  written. 

B.  Did  They  Wish  to  Deceive? — This  is  impossible, 
for  they  had  no  object  in  playing  so  base  a  role;  now  a  man 
must  have  some  reason  for  making  himself  an  impostor. 
Far  from  hoping  to  derive  any  advantage  from  a  fraud  which 
would  have  been  attacked  by  Jews  as  well  as  by  pagans, 
they  could  only  expect  what  they  actually  reaped :  contempt, 
outrages,  persecution,  and,  finally,  to  be  put  to  death.  It  is 
well  known  that  they  sealed  their  testimony  with  their  blood. 


HISTORIC   VALUE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  149 

Pascal  had  reason  to  say:  ''I  readily  believe  the  histories  of 
witnesses  who  sealed  their  testimony  with  their  death/' 
Moreover,  we  have  only  to  read  the  gospels  without  prejudice 
to  be  convinced  that  these  historians  could  not  be  impostors: 
the  sincere,  simple,  candid  tone  of  the  narratives  is  a  guarantee 
of  their  veracity. 

C.  They  could  Not  Deceive. — 1st.  They  wrote  the  gos- 
pels while  numerous  witnesses  of  the  events  related  in  them 
still  lived  who  would  not  have  failed  to  brand  any  falsifi- 
cation. The  Jews,  particularly,  had  the  greatest  interest 
in  doing  so.  The  chiefs  of  the  synagogue,  unable  to  deny 
the  facts,  endeavored  to  suppress  the  new  religion  by  silenc- 
ing the  apostles,  but  they  found  it  impossible  to  dispute 
the  truth  of  the  gospel  narratives.  There  was  question  of 
public  events  of  the  greatest  importance;  they  were  related 
as  occurring  throughout  Judea  and  in  the  very  city  of  Jeru- 
salem, in  the  presence  of  numerous  witnesses  mentioned 
by  name.  Many  who  figured  in  the  events  were  men  of  high 
positions,  inimical  to  Jesus,  and  interested  in  revealing  the 
existence  of  fraud;  hence,  if  protestations  had  been  possible, 
they  would  have  been  loud  and  violent.  Yet  not  a  voice 
was  raised  to  confound  these  impostors!  Such  an  hypothe- 
sis is  manifestly  absurd. 

2d.  One  who  claims  that  the  writings  of  the  New  Testament 
are  inventions  must  admit  the  following  absurdities : 

a.  A  few  unlettered,  uneducated  fishermen  imagined  a 
hero  of  so  grand  a  character  and  so  pure  a  life  that  he  forces 
from  J.  J.  Rousseau  this  spontaneous  tribute  of  admiration: 
''Yes,  if  the  life  and  death  of  Socrates  are  those  of  a  wise 
man,  the  life  and  death  of  Jesus  are  those  of  a  God.''  These 
same  ignorant  men  invented  and  attributed  to  their  hero 
a  doctrine  holier,  more  sublime,  more  profound  than  all 
that  the  most  celebrated  pagan  philosophers  have  ever 
conceived.  *'To  invent  a  Newton,"  says  Parker,  ''one 
would  have  to  be  a  Newton  himself.  What  man  could 
invent  a  person  like  Jesus?    Jesus  alone  could  do  it." 


150  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

h.  These  writers,  contrary  to  the  manner  of  impostors, 
enter  into  the  smallest  details  of  time,  of  place,  of  persons, 
and  yet  there  is  throughout  a  perfect  resemblance,  an  abso- 
lute conformity  to  all  that  we  know  of  that  period  exposed 
to  the  full  light  of  history. 

c.  These  men,  as  ignorant  as  they  were  corrupt,  wrote 
these  fables  of  their  imagination  in  a  style  of  truly  inimitable 
candor  and  sim^plicity.  The  accent  of  truth  in  all  these 
pages  from  various  pens  is  so  striking  that  it  carries  con- 
viction to  every  unbiassed  mind,  and  forces  the  same  Rous- 
seau to  exclaim:  ''Shall  we  say  that  the  history  of  the 
Gospel  is  invented  at  will?  My  friend,  this  is  not  the  way 
inventions  are  made;  and  the  facts  in  the  life  of  Socrates 
are  not  as  well  attested  as  those  in  the  life  of  Jesus  Christ. 
This,  in  reality,  is  abandoning  the  difficulty  instead  of 
solving  it;  it  would  be  easier  to  conceive  that  four  men 
agreed  to  manufacture  this  book  than  that  one  alone  fur- 
nished the  subject  of  it.  Never  could  Jewish  authors  have 
found  either  this  tone  or  this  morality;  the  Gospel  bears 
characters  of  truth  so  great,  so  striking,  so  inimitable,  that 
its  inventor  would  be  more  marvellous  than  its  hero." 

d.  The  various  writers  of  the  gospels,  the  Acts,  and  the 
epistles,  though  separated  by  distance  and  years,  agree  so 
perfectly  in  their  imaginary  narratives,  presented  in  very 
different  forms,  that  no  real  contradiction  can  be  proved 
among  them.  As  to  the  discrepancies  and  apparent  con- 
tradictions in  the  narrations  of  the  four  evangelists,  they 
are  a  proof  that  they  did  not  concert  to  invent  what  they 
relate. 

e.  All  these  writers,  uninfluenced  by  any  interest  tem- 
poral or  eternal,  sealed  with  their  blood  what  they  knew 
to  be  an  invention  on  their  part,  and  after  them  millions  of 
martyrs  died  to  attest  the  same  lie. 

/.  These  same  men,  who  could  have  been  only  base  im- 
postors, succeeded,  without  any  human  assistance,  in  estab- 
lishing their  fraud  so  perfectly  as  to  overthrow  not  only 


HISTORIC   VALUE    OF   THE    BIBLE.  151 

Judaism,  so  ancient  and  so  deeply  rooted,  but  also  paganism, 
bulwarked  by  wealth,  science,  power,  and  a  moral  code 
favoring  human  passions;  they  succeeded  in  making  the 
repentant  world  kneel  at  the  feet  of  a  crucified  criminal; 
succeeded  in  leading  an  immense  number  of  men  to  renounce 
all  they  had  till  then  believed  and  practised,  and  to  adopt 
a  religion  offering  to  the  mind  unfathomable  mysteries,  and 
to  the  will  a  moral  law  contrary  to  all  the  instincts  of  sensual 
nature. 

g.  A  religion  which  has  regenerated  humanity,  created 
the  modern  world  on  the  ruins  of  the  old,  inspired  its 
morality,  its  institutions,  its  laws;  which  has  been  every- 
where an  inexhaustible  source  of  truth,  of  virtues,  and  of 
blessings;  which  counts  among  its  disciples  in  all  ages 
innumerable  scholars  and  saints,  could  not  have  been  founded 
upon  a  lie  invented  by  a  few  fishermen. 

h.  Finally,  God  must  have  confirmed  the  fraud  of  these 
impostors  by  fulfilling  the  prophecies  which  they  invented 
and  attributed  to  Jesus,  and  by  working  innumerable  mira- 
cles in  the  course  of  ages  in  favor  of  their  disciples;  hence 
He  contributed  to  lead  us  into  error. 

In  truth,  if  this  is  the  case,  we  have  reason  to  say  with 
Richard  of  St.  Victor:  ''Lord,  if  I  am  in  error  it  is  Thou 
who  hast  deceived  me,  for  the  Christian  religion  is  con- 
firmed by  signs  Su  striking  and  so  numerous  that  Thou 
alone  canst  be  its  author/' 

Resume  and  Conclusion. — Let  us  quote  here,  by  way 
of  resume,  a  beautiful  page  from  M.  de  Broglie's  UEglise  et 
r Empire  Romain  au  IV^  Sitcle:  ''The  events  related  in  the 
Bible  do  not  belong,  like  the  records  of  ancient  religions, 
to  a  remote,  semi-heroic,  and  semi-barbaric  age,  nor  are 
they  confined  to  some  unknown,  deserted  land.  It  was  in 
the  bosom  of  advanced  civilization,  in  the  principal  city  of 
a  Roman  province,  visited  by  Pompey  and  described  by 
Tacitus,  that  Jesus  Christ  lived,  preached,  established  His 
Church,   and  sacrificed  His  life.    His   biography  has  not 


152  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

come  down  to  us  from  mouth  to  mouth  in  rhapsodies  height- 
ened by  popular  enthusiasm  and  creduhty.  Four  simple, 
precise  narratives,  agreeing  in  their  assertions,  taken  down 
by  ocular  or  contemporaneous  witnesses  in  a  perfectly  intel- 
ligible language,  are  the  documents  upon  which  the  history 
of  Jesus  Christ  is  established.  A  concert  of  ancient  testi- 
mony, a  prompt  diffusion,  the  similarity  of  the  texts  spread 
throughout  the  entire  world,  the  conformity  of  the  narra- 
tives to  contemporaneous  chronology,  constitute  characters 
which  in  their  turn  entitle  the  evangelic  writings  to  rank 
among  the  authentic  monuments  of  the  past.  The  authen- 
ticity of  the  facts  rests  upon  no  other  foundation;  criticism 
can  exact  nothing  more.  We  know  Jesus  Christ  through 
His  disciples  John  and  Matthew,  St.  Paul  through  Luke, 
the  companion  of  his  travels.  Have  we  any  other  knowl- 
edge of  Alexander  or  Augustus  than  that  furnished  us  by 
their  companions  in  arms  or  their  courtiers?  Because 
facts  belong  to  the  domain  of  faith  and  astonish  reason, 
because  they  carry  with  them  a  certain  order  of  moral 
consequences,  is  this  any  reason  for  rejecting,  in  regard  to 
them,  all  the  ordinary  rules  of  human  judgment?  We  ask  no 
other  favor  for  the  Gospel  than  that  of  being  judged  by  the 
usual  tests  applied  by  science  and  erudition."  M.  de  Wallon 
remarks  in  his  turn,  at  the  conclusion  of  his  beautiful  work, 
La  Croyance  due  a  VEvangile:  ''If  we  were  as  exacting 
and  as  critical  in  regard  to  ancient  or  modern  books  as  we 
are  in  regard  to  the  New  Testament,  history  would  still  be 
unwritten,  for  want  of  duly  authenticated  records;  we 
should  be  still  in  the  mythological  age."  ^ 

IV.    Answers  to  Objections. 

A.  General  Reply. — We  cannot  enter  into  detail  here  in 
regard  to  all  the  objections  which  adversaries  have  been 
pleased  to  collect  against  the  veracity  of  the  gospels.     More- 

*  Lacordaire,  6th  conf .  on  Jesus  Christ. 


HISTORIC   VALUE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  153 

over,  the  solid  character  of  our  thesis  does  not  require  this 
special  refutation,  particularly  as  we  are  treating  the  question 
of  the  veracity  of  the  Scriptures  only  from  an  historical 
point  of  view.  Therefore  we  shall  confine  ourselves  to  the 
following  reflections,  which  we  have  borrowed  also  from 
M.  de  Broglie. 

All  the  objections  usually  alleged,  either  against  the 
authenticity  of  the  gospels  or  the  truth  of  the  facts  related 
in  them,  come  necessarily  under  one  or  other  of  the  following 
principal  heads: 

1st.  The  miraculous  character  of  the  facts  stated. 

2d.  The  want  of  harmony  in  the  various  gospel  narratives. 

3d.  The  contradiction  between  certain  facts  related  by 
the  evangelists  and  the  facts  of  chronology  or  contempo- 
raneous history  as  given  us  by  profane  writers. 

Let  us  see  what  we  are  to  think  of  each  of  these  chief 
accusations. 

1st.  The  miraculous  character  of  the  facts  of  the  Gospel 
proves  absolutely  nothing  against  the  authenticity  and  truth 
of  them,  unless  we  claim  to  reject  a  'priori,  without  any 
proof,  all  miracles  as  impossible.  If,  as  logic  and  common 
sense  require,  we  admit  the  possibiUty  of  miracles,  the  mirac- 
ulous events  related  in  the  gospels  cannot  be  urged  against 
the  veracity  of  the  evangelists:  these  facts  are  capable  of 
proof  like  any  other,  first  by  the  senses,  and  afterward  by 
testimony  when  they  have  ceased  to  exist.  Later  on  we 
shall  speak  ex  professo  of  the  possibihty  of  miracles  and 
their  verification  (ch.  III.  art.  2). 

2d.  As  to  the  variations  in  the  gospels,  they  may  be 
ranged  into  two  classes:  variations  through  omission,  when 
one  evangehst  omits  what  another  includes,  is  silent  when 
another  speaks;  variations  through  contradiction,  when  sev- 
eral evangehsts  give  apparently  irreconcilable  versions  of  the 
same  fact. 

The  first  are  of  no  importance  whatever,  and  this  is  the 
case  with  the  majority  of  the  variations  found  in  the  gospels. 


154  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

We  know,  moreover,  that  the  apostles,  whose  teaching,  hke 
that  of  the  Jewish  rabbins  and  according  to  the  command 
of  Jesus  Himself,  was  essentially  oral,  wrote  only  occasionally, 
with  no  intention  to  form  a  complete  body  of  doctrine,  nor 
to  relate  all  the  acts  of  Jesus.  The  evangelists  expressly 
declare  that  they  are  far  from  having  written  all  that  they 
knew  upon  this  subject. 

The  variations  through  contradiction  constitute  a  more 
serious  difficulty.  But  let  us  remark  that  the  contradictions 
between  two  versions  of  the  same  fact,  even  if  duly  proved, 
impugn  the  accuracy  only  of  certain  details  of  the  fact;  they 
do  not  authorize  us  to  reject  either  the  substance  of  the  fact, 
or  other  facts  concerning  which  the  narrations  agree.  Now 
the  apparent  contradictions  between  the  evangelists  all  relate 
to  insignificant  points,  unimportant  details.^  As  to  the 
whole  history,  and  the  precious  and  touching  truths  con- 
tained in  the  simple  gospel  narrative,  the  agreement  is 
complete.  Never  have  writers  better  described  the  same 
person;  never  have  they  more  strikingly  exhibited  that 
perfect  unity  which  is  the  appanage  only  of  truth. 

3d.  In  regard  to  the  disagreement  of  the  Gospel  with  the 
facts  of  the  history  of  that  time,  by  making  the  same  dis- 
tinctions we  shall  attain  the  same  result.  These  variations, 
which  are,  moreover,  very  few,  may  also  be  ranged  as  omis- 
sions and  contradictions. 

The  first  class  prove  nothing,  particularly  as  the  Gospel 
does  not  deal  with  facts  which  at  that  period  would  certainly 
have  come  within  the  province  of  the  historians  of  Rome 
and  have  figured  in  contemporaneous  annals;  it  relates  the 
history  of  a  carpenter,  living  in  a  city  of  the  province,  and 
whose  influence  was  at  first  sufficiently  restricted  to  have 
escaped  the  attention  of  Suetonius  and  Tacitus.     When  the 

^  A  few  slight  errors  in  unimportant  details  in  no  way  weaken  the 
authority  of  an  historian.  When  there  is  question  of  an  inspired 
historian,  we  can  attribute  no  error  to  him;  but  in  our  present  study 
we  are  considering  the  gospels  only  as  historical  documents. 


HISTORIC   VALUE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  155 

Christians  became  numerous  enough  in  Rome  itself  to  awaken 
the  attention  of  philosophers  and  of  the  Roman  officials, 
that  is,  about  thirty  years  after  the  death  of  Christ,  then, 
and  then  only,  would  the  great  annalists  have  to  mention 
them.  It  is  precisely  at  this  period  that  Tacitus  speaks  of  the 
Christians  (followers  of  Christ)  as  persecuted  in  Rome  by  Nero. 

There  remain  the  contradictions  which  may  be  found 
between  the  very  small  number  of  dates  mentioned  in  evan- 
gelical history  and  the  general  chronology  of  contempora- 
neous history.  As  we  have  already  said,  even  though  we 
could  not  explain  them,  or  do  away  with  them  by  any  plausi- 
ble supposition,  the  only  result  would  be  to  make  doubtful 
the  dates  of  certain  events  in  the  Gospel,  the  name  of  some 
governor  of  Judea  at  that  period,  and  similar  absolutely 
secondary  points.  But  the  essential  facts  would  remain  no 
less  firmly  established ;  it  would  be  no  less  incontestable  that 
Jesus  Christ  came  into  the  world,  that  He  spoke  in  prophecy, 
that  He  wrought  miracles,  that  He  died  on  the  cross,  that 
He  rose  from  the  dead.  Now  these  are  not  points  of  second- 
ary but  of  primary  importance  which  cannot  be  disputed, 
and  which  serve  to  prove  the  di\dnity  of  the  mission  of 
Christ  and  of  His  work,  the  Christian  religion. 

In  regard  to  the  difficulties  concerning  details,  they  are  to 
be  found  stated  and  explained  in  the  commentaries  on  the 
Holy  Scriptures. 

B.  Reply  to  Special  Objections. — Let  us  remark,  first, 
that  it  is  not  at  all  astonishing  that  we  should  sometimes 
be  perplexed  concerning  the  interpretation  of  a  text  when 
there  is  question  of  peoples  whose  customs,  habits,  and 
language  are  so  different  from  our  own.  Many  things  which 
are  obscure  to  us,  and  seem  at  times  to  imply  contradiction, 
must  have  been  very  clear,  very  comprehensible  to  contem- 
poraries, and  consequently  required  no  explanation.  Thus, 
according  as  linguistics,  numismatics,  history,  and  geography 
advance,  the  obscurities  disappear  and  the  texts  become 
clearer. 


166  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS 

First  Objection. — There  have  been  false  gospels,  hence 
ours  may  be  false. 

Reply. — 1st.  It  would  be  just  as  reasonable  to  say  there 
is  false  coin,  hence  there  is  no  genuine.  It  is  the  contrary 
of  the  proposition  which  is  true,  and  we  may  say  with  Pascal: 
''Instead  of  concluding  that  because  there  are  apocryphal 
gospels  there  are  none  that  are  genuine,  we  have  to  admit, 
on  the  contrary,  that  there  must  be  genuine  gospels  since 
there  are  apocryphal,  and  that  it  is  the  genuine  which  have 
given  rise  to  the  apocryphal.''  The  latter  could  have  been 
only  counterfeits  of  the  real  gospels,  to  which  this  very 
attempt  at  imitation  renders  homage.  In  fact,  if  the 
authors  of  the  apocryphal  gospels  presumed  to  relate  such 
things,  and  succeeded  in  obtaining  credence  for  them,  it  was 
only  because  they  were  more  or  less  in  harmony  with  the 
authentic  gospels,  of  which  they  assumed  the  character  and 
authority,  and  because  one  and  the  other  were  in  accord 
with  recent  events,  with  tradition,  with  all  the  monuments, 
with  all  the  contemporaneous  memories  of  Judea. 

2d.  We  have  positive  proof  of  the  false  character  of  the 
gospels  called  apocryphal,  while,  on  the  contrary,  the  authen- 
ticity and  truth  of  our  four  gospels  are  established,  as  we 
have  seen,  by  incontestable  proofs.  In  proportion  as  these 
bear  all  the  marks  of  absolute  authenticity  the  others  bear 
evidence  of  improbability  or  bad  faith.  "These  composi- 
tions,'' says  Renan,  ''should  not  by  any  means  be  placed  on 
a  footing  with  the  canonical  gospels." 

3d.  These  apocryphal  gospels  were  never  accepted  by  the 
Church  and  they  soon  disappeared,  while  our  four  gospels 
have  always  been  distinguished  as  the  only  authentic  ones, 
not  only  by  the  Church,  but  by  heretics  and  pagans  them- 
selves. "The  Church,"  says  Origen,  "has  four  gospels; 
heresy  has  many." 

Second  Objection. — ^We  are  told  by  Strauss  that  all 
religion  among  the  Greeks,  the  Romans,  the  Germans,  and 
the  Indians  began  with  myths,  that  is,  with  fables,  in  which 


HISTORIC    VALUE    OF   THE    BIBLE.  157 

a  moral  idea,  a  physical  event,  etc.,  was  represented  under 
the  figure  of  a  man  who  never  existed.^  He  also  claims  that 
it  is  the  same  with  the  Christian  religion,  where  all  that 
belongs  to  humanity  is  attributed  to  a  unique  hero,  to  Jesus 
Christ. 

Reply. — 1st.  What  we  have  just  said  in  regard  to  the  absurd 
consequences  of  any  fraud  on  the  part  of  the  apostles  is 
equally  applicable  to  the  hypothesis  of  a  myth.  We  should 
have  to  admit  that  a  myth,  a  lying  fabrication,  founded  an 
institution  as  real,  as  efficacious,  as  indestructible  as  the 
Church;  that  a  myth  wrought  the  conversion  of  the  world; 
that  the  very  authors  of  the  fraud  and  millions  of  their 
followers  laid  down  their  lives  to  witness  to  its  truth. 

2d.  That  other  religions  should  be  based  upon  fables  is 
perfectly  natural,  since  they  are  false.  For  this  reason  their 
origin  is  carefully  assigned  to  prehistoric  times,  that  is,  to  an 
obscure  period  where  the  imagination  of  the  poets  is  un- 
trammelled by  historical  facts.  It  is  quite  otherwise  with 
Christianity :  it  belongs  to  a  period  subjected  to  the  full  light 
of  history,  to  a  period  of  intellectual  activity,  where  even 
scepticism  was  rife,  to  a  period,  consequently,  where  fabulous 
relations  would  be  received  with  even  greater  incredulity 
than  at  the  present  day.  How  can  the  mythical  characters 
of  other  religions  compare  with  that  of  Jesus,  so  lifelike,  so 
imbued  with  sweet  and  simple  majesty?  The  most  super- 
ficial observer,  to  recognize  the  incontestable  character  of 
historic  truth  in  the  Gospel,  has  only  to  compare  the  mythical 
legends,  always  so  obscure,  so  vague,  confounding  times, 
places,  and  persons,  with  the  detailed,  explicit  narration  of 
the  acts  of  the  gospel  hero. 

3d.  Moreover,  to  apply  the  system  of  myths  to  Jesus  Christ 
is  to  destroy  all  history.  Certainly  no  one  doubts  the  ex- 
istence of  Napoleon  I.  and  the  reality  of  his  renowned  deeds. 
Yet  by  having  recourse  to  myths  we  could  demonstrate  very 

•M.;  June  and  July  77;  Lord  Arundel,  Nature-myth  Untenable] 
C.  W.  xvii.  209. 


158  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

plausibly  that  the  great  conqueror  of  modern  times  never 
existed/  If  we  are  told  that  the  works  of  Napoleon  survive 
him  and  powerfully  protest  against  the  hypothesis  of  a  mytii, 
we  do  not  deny  it;  but  the  Church  also  and  the  whole  Chris- 
tian world,  the  works  of  Jesus  Christ,  have  shone  before  the 
eyes  of  the  whole  universe  for  more  than  eighteen  centuries; 
their  very  existence  proves  most  clearly  that  Christ,  as  He 
is  represented  in  the  Gospel,  was  the  grandest  and  most 
powerful  reality  that  ever  appeared  in  this  world.  ^ 

Third  Objection. — Renan  in  his  ''Life  of  Jesus,"  not 
daring  to  reproduce  the  too  absurd  theory  of  Strauss,  modifies 
it  in  a  way  to  attain  the  same  end,  that  is  to  deny  the  divin- 
ity of  Christ.  As  he  has  no  belief  in  the  supernatural,  and 
alleges  that  no  miracle  has  yet  been  proved,  he  denies  all 
that  is  miraculous  in  the  life  of  Our  Saviour.  It  must  neces- 
sarily be  attributed  to  the  excited  imagination  of  His  dis- 
ciples; all  that  they  relate  of  miraculous  events  are  only 
legends  with  no  historic  value. 

Reply. — We  shall  not  reproduce  here  the  magnificent 
and  annihilating  arguments  with  which  Renan's  sad  and 
impious  romance  has  been  refuted,  but  content  ourselves 
with  a  few  reflections. 

1st.  Renan 's  whole  theory  rests  solely  on  the  affirmation 
of  the  non-existence  of  the  supernatural  and  of  miracles. 
But  whatever  the  vigor  of  this  affirmation,  it  does  not 
cease  to  be  purely  gratuitous,  unproven,  and  contrary  to 
the  legitimate  and  universal  belief.  Let  us  remark,  first, 
that  if  we  prove  the  existence  of  one  miracle  since  the  begin- 
ning of  the  world,  Renan's  entire  structure  crumbles  to  its 
base.  Now  we  shall  prove,  very  decisively,  the  reality  of 
numerous  miracles. 

2d.  All   that  we  have  said  of  Strauss'  myths  is  equally 

^  This  has  been  done  by  the  Protestant  Archbishop  Whately  in  a 
brilliant  jeu  d' esprit  against  Strauss  entitled  "Historic  Doubts  con- 
cerning Napoleon  Buonaparte."     D.  R.,  Oct.  '77,  p.  559. 

^  See  Lacordaire,  7th  conf .  on  Jesus  Christ. 


HISTORIC   VALUE   OF  THE   BIBLE.  159 

applicable  to  Kenan's  legends.  The  arguments  which  de- 
stroy one  are  equally  fatal  to  the  other. 

3d.  Renan  is  in  contradiction  with  his  own  theory  when 
he  affects  to  respect  Jesus.  According  to  him  this  Jesus  was 
nothing  raore  than  a  base  impostor,  who,  knowing  that  he 
was  a  mere  man  like  his  fellows,  allowed  himself  to  be  honored 
as  a  worker  of  miracles  and  adored  as  a  God. 

4th.  Let  us  add  that  this  same  writer  gives  in  his  book 
numerous  and  absolutely  manifest  proofs  of  bad  faith;  he 
goes  so  far  as  to  falsify  t^xts  with  the  greatest  effrontery, 
to  cite  them  in  a  sense  contrary  to  their  natural  and  certain 
signification;  he  refers  the  reader  to  passages  saying  the  very 
opposite  of  what  he  claims.  Abundant  proofs  of  this  want 
of  honesty  are  to  be  found  in  Henri  Lasserre's  interesting 
work  entitled  Le  13 e  Apotre. 

Conclusion  and  Transition. — The  inevitable  conclusion 
of  the  preceding  pages  is  that  the  Pentateuch  and  the  gospels 
possess,  in  an  historical  point  of  view,  incontestable  authority, 
and  merit  unreserved  belief.  They  afford  an  invulnerable 
basis  for  the  proofs  in  favor  of  supernatural  religion,  which 
we  shall  presently  give.  Supported  by  these  documents  we 
can  establish  successively  the  divinity  of  the  primitive  reve- 
lation, then  that  of  the  Mosaic  religion,  finally  that  of  the 
Christian  religion.  This  historic  method  will  have  the  ad- 
vantage of  being  very  complete,  and  it  has  been  employed  to 
advantage,  particularly  in  the  last  century,  by  the  defenders 
of  the  faith. 

Contemporaneous  infidels,  Voltaire  particularly,  had  in  fact 
accumulated  against  the  teachings  and  the  relations  of  the 
Old  Testament  a  quantity  of  sophisms  which  it  was  necessary 
to  destroy.  But  these  objections,  devoid  of  all  foundation, 
and  bolstered,  for  the  most  part,  by  scoffs  and  jests,  have  lost 
their  force ;  we  have  no  need  to  occupy  ourselves  with  them. 

To-day  the  discussion  has  reached  the  very  heart  of  the 
question.  The  rationalist  school  pretend  to  find  in  Jesus 
sometimes  a  wise  man  who  by  the  power  of  his  genius  has 


160  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

done  much  to  promote  the  progress  of  the  human  race, 
sometimes  an  arrant  impostor  by  whom  men  have  been  too 
long  deceived.  We  shall  boldly  attack  these  impious  state- 
ments and  furnish  direct  proof  of  the  divinity  of  the  Chris- 
tian religion,  the  crown  and  completion  of  the  other  two 
with  which  it  is  intimately  united.  When  we  shall  have 
established  that  Jesus  Christ  was  truly  sent  by  God,  His 
testimony  alone,  henceforth  incontestable,  will  abundantly 
suffice  to  establish  the  divinity  of  the  two  religious  phases 
which  prepared  man  for  His  coming. 

We  shall  demonstrate  that  Jesus  Christ  has  been  truly 
sent  by  God  to  impose  upon  men  a  new  rehgion,  more  per- 
fect than  those  which  preceded  it. 


CHAPTER  III. 

DEMONSTRATION  OF  THE  DIVINITY  OF   THE  CHRISTIAN 

RELIGION. 

ART.  I.— REMARKS  ON  THE  METHOD  TO  FOLLOW  IN 
THIS  DEMONSTRATION. 

1st.  Among  the  distinctive  signs  of  true  revelation  the 
Fathers  and  apologists,  interpreters  of  Christian  tradition, 
have  always  placed  in  the  first  rank  miracle  and  prophecy, 
which  is  also  a  miracle  of  the  intellectual  order.  They  have 
always  seen  here  the  incontestable  testimony  of  God,  the 
seal,  as  it  were,  of  Heaven's  communications  with  earth. 
For  a  long  time  ancient  and  modern  adversaries  of  Chris- 
tianity agreed  with  its  defenders  on  this  point;  though 
they  denied  the  reaUty  of  miracles  attested  by  Christians, 
they  never  questioned  the  irrefragable  value  of  a  miracle 
fully  demonstrated. 

2d.  That  rationahsts  should  object  to  this  method  we  can 
readily  conceive.  Rejecting  revelation  completely,  all  that 
remains  to  them  is  a  purely  natural  rehgion  which  has 
sprung  in  a  perfect  state  from  the  human  intelligence  and 
conscience.  This  religion,  they  tell  us,  is  only  a  code  of 
morals;  its  precepts  escape  the  inquisition  of  science;  they 
must  be  observed,  however,  for  man  is  made  to  live  in 
society.  If  this  is  the  case,  the  principal  character  of  the 
true  religion  is  the  morality  of  the  doctrine:  it  furnishes 
the  supreme  criterion  which  each  one's  own  reason  should 
enable  him  to  appreciate.  As  to  miracles,  it  goes  without 
saying  that  they  reject  them  completely,  or  admit  them 
only  in  name.  All  that  is  represented  in  the  Scriptures 
as   supernatural   events,    miracles,    prophecies,    should   be 

161 


162  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

regarded  as  figurative  expressions,  as  representative  laws 
and  duties;  these  events  must  be  brought  into  the  category 
either  of  rational  concepts  or  of  natural  facts.  In  this  does 
the  office  of  interpreter  consist;  here  is  what  Kant,  the 
first  author  of  this  theory,  calls  moral  accommodation. 

3d.  Even  Catholics  have  sometimes  been  perplexed  as  to  the 
proper  method  for  an  apology  of  faith.  In  answering  the 
difficulties  and  sarcasms  which  the  infidels  of  the  last  century 
had  accumulated,  in  the  name  of  science  and  philosophy, 
against  miracles,  the  defenders  of  the  faith  felt  that  they 
could  not  be  too  wary,  and  deemed  it  wiser  tactics  to  de- 
monstrate the  moral  beauty  of  the  Christian  religion  and 
the  wonderful  changes  it  had  wrought  in  the  world.  Such 
considerations  are  of  undoubted  value,  and  we  ourselves 
will  have  recourse  to  them  later;  we  do  so  the  more  will- 
ingly that  we  find  in  them  proofs  of  a  direct  intervention 
on  the  part  of  God. 

4th.  The  true  method,  however,  is  that  which  the  Church 
has  always  used :  it  consists  in  stating,  first,  the  proofs  directly 
furnished  by  God,  and  consequently  most  proper  to  estab- 
lish the  divinity  of  the  fact  of  Revelation,  that  is,  miracles 
and  prophecies.  Let  us  hear,  on  this  subject,  the  opinion 
of  Cardinal  Pie,  bishop  of  Poitiers.  ''Mira-cle,"  the  illus- 
trious prelate  writes,  "is  the  veritable  pivot  of  the  Christian 
religion.  Neither  through  His  prophets  nor  through  His 
Son  did  God  endeavor  to  demonstrate  by  any  process  of 
reasoning  the  possibiHty  of  the  truths  which  He  taught, 
or  the  fitness  of  the  precepts  which  He  imposed  upon  the 
world.  He  spoke.  He  commanded;  and  as  a  guarantee  of 
His  doctrine,  as  a  justification  of  His  authority.  He  worked 
miracles.  Hence  we  are  in  no  way  permitted  to  abandon 
or  weaken,  by  placing  in  a  subordinate  rank,  an  order  of 
proofs  which  occupies  the  first  place  in  the  economy  and  in 
the  history  of  the  establishment  of  Christianity.  Miracle, 
which  belongs  to  the  order  of  facts,  is  inestimably  more  con- 
vincing to  the  multitude  than  all  other  kinds  of  arguments; 


DIVINITY   OF   THE    CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  163 

it  is  a  means  by  which  a  rehgion  is  imposed  and  made  pop- 
ular."    (Instr.  Synod.) 

But  we  have  a  still  higher  and  more  decisive  authority. 
Here  is  the  exphcit  declaration  of  the  Vatican  Council: 
''In  order  that  the  homage  of  our  faith  may  be  in  harmony 
with  reason  God  has  willed  to  add  to  the  interior  aids  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  exterior  proofs  of  EQs  revelation,  that  is, 
divine  facts,  particularly  miracles  and  prophecies,  which, 
demonstrating  with  e^ddence  the  almighty  power  and  infi- 
nite knowledge  of  God,  afford  in  behalf  of  divine  revela- 
tion very  certain  signs  suitable  to  the  intelligence  of  all." 
(Const,  on  the  CathoHc  Faith,  ch.  2.) 

We  see  now  why  prophecy  and,  particularly,  miracles 
have  been  so  fiercely  attacked  by  rationalists.  It  is  for 
us,  consequently,  to  put  in  the  clearest  hght  their  convincing 
power.  To  this  end  we  shall  give  a  few  philosophic  no- 
tions concerning  miracle  and  prophecy,  refute  the  principal 
objections,  and  thus  prepare  the  ground  upon  which  our 
demonstration  of  the  truth  of  Christianity  is  to  be  erected. 

ART.  II.— MIRACLE  AND  PROPHECY. 

Four  questions  present  themselves  for  our  examination: 
I.  The  nature  of  miracle  and  prophecy.  II.  The  possi- 
bihty  of  miracle  and  prophecy.  III.  The  means  of  recog- 
nizing and  distinguishing  them  from  natural  facts.  IV. 
Their  demonstrative  value  or  conclusive  evidence. 

I.  Miracle.^ 

Nature  or  Notion  of  Miracle. — The  word  miracle  comes 
from  the  Latin  word  mirari,  to  be  astonished.      The  strictly 

*  Bp.  Hay;  Card.  Newman;  Kegan  Paul  in  C.  T.  S.  xvi.;  Schanz, 
II.,  ch.  10;  Walworth,  ch.  15;  Hettinger,  R.  R.,  ch.  3;  Chatard, 
essay  16;  Boedder,  B.  III.,  ch.  3;  'Hunter,  L,  treat.  I.,  ch.  2  ff.; 
I.  E.  R.,  Aug.  '97;  P.  Murray,  Essay  on  Miracles;  Archbp.  O'Brien, 
pt.  iii.,  ch.  6;  Spalding,  Evidences,  lect.  5. 


164  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

etymological  meaning  is  something  which  causes  astonish- 
ment. Now  nothing  causes  more  astonishment  than  an  effect 
the  cause  of  which  is  unknown  or  which  seems  to  be  beyond 
the  causes  operating  to  produce  it. 

It  is  true  that  among  these  marvellous  effects  there  are 
some  the  cause  of  which  is  unknown  to  certain  minds,  but 
very  clear  to  others.  Thus  the  cause  of  eclipses  is  a  mystery 
to  the  unlettered,  but  no  secret  to  the  astronomer.  Evi- 
dently this  is  not  the  kind  of  miracle  of  which  there  is  ques- 
tion here. 

There  are  other  effects  which  no  created  force  could  pro- 
duce and  which  claim  divine  operation,  the  intervention 
of  God  Himself.  Such  are  veritable  miracles,  and  it  is  in 
this  class  that  we  find  characteristic  proof  of  revelation. 
Yet  any  intervention  on  the  part  of  God  does  not  suffice  to 
constitute  a  miracle,  for  God  intervenes  in  all  the  acts  of 
His  creatures.  There  must  be  a  special  intervention  by 
which  God  suspends  in  a  particular  case  the  general  laws 
which  He  has  imposed  upon  all  things. 

A  miracle  thus  understood  may  be  defined  as  an  effect 
which  exceeds  all  the  forces  of  nature  and  can  be  produced 
only  by  the  special  intervention  of  God  Himself.  There 
are  also  miracles  which  are  absolutely  beyond  the  senses, 
as,  for  example,  the  eucharistic  transubstantiation  and  the 
extraordinary  operations  of  supernatural  grace.  Miracles 
of  this  kind,  though  very  real,  evidently  cannot  serve  to 
prove  the  truth  of  a  religion;  we  must  have  palpable,  mani- 
fest facts.  We  can  understand,  therefore,  why  apologetic 
authors  generally  prefer  the  following  definition,  which  we, 
in  our  turn,  have  adopted.  A  miracle  is  a  sensible  effect 
which  surpasses  the  natural  energies  of  the  universe,  and 
which,  in  the  general  conditions  under  which  it  is  produced, 
manifestly  reveals  an  immediate  and  extraordinary  inter- 
vention of  divine  almighty  power.  We  may  also  say  that 
a  miracle  is  an  extraordinary  manifestation  of  God  through 
a  sensible  work  which  no  human  agent  can  produce. 


DIVINITY   OP  THE   CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  165 

Possibility  of  Miracles. — A  reasonable  man  who 
admits  the  existence  of  God  cannot  doubt  the  possi- 
biUty  of  miracles.  This  was  so  apparent  even  to  the 
impious  Rousseau  that  he  says:  ''Can  God  perform 
miracles,  that  is,  can  He  derogate  the  laws  which  He 
has  established?  To  treat  this  question  seriously  w^ould 
be  impious  if  it  were  not  absurd.  To  punish  one  who 
answered  it  negatively  would  be  doing  him  too  much 
honor;  he  ought  to  be  sent  to  a  madhouse.  But  who  has 
ever  denied  that  God  can  work  miracles?"  The  convic- 
tion of  the  possibility  of  miracles  is,  moreover,  so  natural  to 
man  that  belief  in  miracles  has  existed  at  all  times  among 
all  peoples.  Neither  the  Jews  nor  the  pagans,  nor  even  the 
bitterest  and  cleverest  enemies  of  Christianity,  such  as 
Celsus  and  Julian  the  Apostate,  ever  thought  of  combating 
Christianity  by  objecting  that  the  miracles  upon  which  it 
rests  are  impossible.  Yet  it  would  have  been  a  summary 
and  very  easy  means  of  stifling  the  new  religion  in  its  cradle. 

The  modern  enemies  of  the  supernatural  and  of  all  positive 
religion  have  shown  themselves  wiser  in  their  generation. 
As  the  impossibility  of  miracles  is  a  vital  point  in  their  sys- 
tem and  cannot,  moreover,  be  proved,  they  have  been  care- 
ful to  establish  it  as  an  incontestable  axiom.  This  manner 
of  proceeding,  though  no  doubt  convenient,  is  not  very 
scientific  or  convincing:  the  absence  of  argument  is  too 
apparent.  There  are  those,  however,  who  claim  to  support 
the  axiom  with  apparent  proofs  furnished  by  philosophy 
and  science.  We  shall  have  occasion  to  show"  how  little 
foundation  they  have. 

Remark. — The  same  motive  which  makes  miracles  the 
chief  aim  of  the  attacks  of  modern  rationalism,  explains  its 
fierce  warfare  against  the  dogma  of  divine  Providence,  that 
is,  the  special  intervention  of  God  in  the  government  of  the 
world,  and  the  efficacy  of  prayer,  an  inevitable  corollary.^ 

^  With  rationalists  nothing  is  easier  than  to  make  assertions  of  this 
kind:    "Absolute,  inflexible   necessity  governs   matter;    the  law   of 


166  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 


Thesis. — Miracles  are  Possible, 

First  Argument. — ^We  might  confine  ourselves  to  this 
simple  statement:  Miracles  exist,  hence  miracles  are  possi- 
ble. Yes;  we  shall  prove  that  history  witnesses  to  sensible 
facts  which  no  human  agent  can  produce,  and  which  require 
extraordinary  and  immediate  intervention  on  the  part 
of  God.  Thenceforth  all  that  can  be  alleged  against  the 
possibility  of  miracles  is  absolutely  null:  ah  esse  ad  posse 
valet  illatio;  the  existence  of  a  fact  demonstrates  its  possi- 
bility. And  let  us  remark  that  the  fact  of  one  well-estab- 
lished miracle,  at  any  period  of  the  world,  is  sufficient  to 
refute  the  capital  objection  of  unbelievers,  and  thus  destroy 
the  entire  foundation  of  their  impious  arguments. 

Second  Argument. — Miracle  is  possible  if  there  is  nothing 
to  prevent  it  either  on  the  part  of  creatures  or  on  the  part 
of  God.     Now  there  is  nothing  to  prevent  it: 

a.  On  the  part  of  creatures,  who  in  their  being  and  their 
manner  of  existence  are  and  remain  essentially  dependent 


nature  is  a  mechanical,  eternal,  immutable  law,  which  is  confounded 
with  the  laws  of  reason  itself;  it  is  the  most  rigid  expression  of  neces- 
sity; no  power  can  escape  this  necessity,  which  knows  no  exception 
or  restriction."  But  let  them  prove  these  assertions,  denied  by 
the  intimate  conviction  of  the  human  race,  and  the  universal  and 
perpetual  custom  of  prayer  and  sacrifice.  We  can  readily  see,  more- 
over, how  they  lead  to  the  most  wretched  fatalism  and  to  the  de- 
struction of  all  morality.  It  is  certain,  on  the  contrary,  that  the 
constancy  (absolute  constancy)  of  force  in  the  universe  cannot  be 
scientifically  demonstrated;  it  is  certain  that  the  animal  world  is 
not  devoid  of  all  creative  faculty,  that  the  movements  of  the  will 
alter  the  constancy  of  the  total  energy  of  the  universe;  it  is  certain 
that  above  the  law  of  the  conservation  of  matter  and  of  force  reigns  an 
enlightening  and  completing  principle,  a  sovereign  idea  which  domi- 
nates all:  the  idea  of  order  and  of  finality,  without  which  the  world 
would  be  no  more  than  a  mass  of  facts;  it  is  equally  certain  that  in  the 
system  of  the  world  the  laws  could  have  been  other  than  they  are. 
(Duhamel.) 


DIVINITY   OF  THE   CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  167 

on  their  Creator,  and  absolutely  submissive  to  His  sovereign 
will.  If  they  are  subject  to  the  general  physical  laws  which 
God  has  established,  why  should  they  be  less  so  to  a  special 
order  of  this  same  God? 

h.  On  the  part  of  God,  whose  almighty  and  independent 
power  created  the  world  and  freely  gave  it  the  laws  by  which 
it  is  governed.  Why  should  God  be  subject  to  these  laws? 
Why  should  He  be  so  bound  by  His  own  work  as  to  be  no 
longer  its  master,  but  its  slave?  Why  cannot  He,  like  a 
human  legislator,  determine  in  advance  the  exceptions  to 
the  laws  He  makes?  Because,  for  example,  God  has  willed 
that,  as  a  general  rule,  moisture  and  heat  should  be  the  con- 
ditions for  the  germination  and  development  of  plants,  has  He 
deprived  Himself  of  the  power  of  causing  grain  to  germinate 
and  ripen  without  heat  and  without  moisture?  Such  a 
statement  is  simply  absurd;  it  reduces  the  Creator,  the 
sovereign  Master  of  the  world,  to  a  sort  of  purely  passive 
being,  ruled  by  a  supreme  necessity;  in  a  word,  it  denies 
the  very  existence  of  God.  In  fact  one  must  be  an  atheist 
to  affirm  the  impossibility  of  miracles. 

Objection. — What  is  the  great  objection  raised  against 
these  arguments  so  conclusive  for  every  upright  intelligence? 
That  a  miracle  is  contrary  to  the  immutabihty  and  to  the 
wisdom  of  God;  in  other  words,  that  any  change  in  the 
general  laws  established  by  God  would  indicate  ignorance  or 
fickleness  of  purpose  on  His  part. 

Reply. — 1st.  The  immutability  of  God  is  in  no  way  com- 
promised by  a  miracle,  since  a  miracle  argues  no  change  in 
the  divine  decrees.  Deus  opera  mutat,  says  St.  Augustine,  non 
consilium.  God  decrees,  by  the  same  indivisible  and  eternal 
act  of  His  will,  the  laws  themselves  and  the  exceptions  to 
these  laws  in  special  cases.  Miracles,  therefore,  form  a  part 
of  the  divine  plan.  The  will  of  God,  as  well  as  His  thought, 
embraces  in  one  single  act  the  past,  the  present,  and  the 
future,  the  whole  universe  and  each  of  the  beings  who  com- 
pose it.    In  determining  that  the  usual  action  of  these  laws 


168  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

shall  be  suspended  in  a  special  case,  God  does  not  change  His 
decrees;  He  fulfils  them.^ 

2d.  The  wisdom  of  God  is  no  more  compromised  than  His 
immutability. 

a.  A  miracle  is  performed  for  a  determined  and  reasonable 
end:  in  view  of  some  moral  good.  It  behooves  us  to  re- 
member that  the  entire  order  of  the  universe  includes  both 
the  moral  and  physical  order;  but  the  physical  world  is 
destined  to  serve  the  moral.  Hence  it  is  evidently  worthy 
of  God  to  refer  everything  to  the  salvation  of  souls  and  the 
preservation  of  His  Church;  it  is  worthy  of  His  wisdom  to 
confirm  the  truth  of  a  doctrine  coming  from  Him,  or  the 

^  The  objection  in  regard  to  the  immutability  of  God  has  no  more 
weight  against  the  efficacy  of  prayer  than  against  miracles.  In 
hearing  our  prayers,  God,  who  has  foreseen  and  willed  all  things  in 
one  simple  act,  does  not  change;  He  is  not  like  us  limited  by  time, 
which  is  His  creature  as  much  as  any  atom  in  the  universe;  He  does 
not  interrupt  the  course  of  general  laws.  He  fulfils  them ;  He  does  not 
modify  His  resolutions.  He  executes  them.  We  do  not  pray,  St. 
Thomas  tells  us,  in  order  to  change  the  divine  plan,  but  to  obtain 
the  accomplishment  of  that  which,  in  this  plan,  was  left  dependent 
on  our  prayers.  "When  a  soul,"  says  Euler,  "offers  a  prayer  worthy 
to  be  heard  by  God,  we  must  not  imagine  that  it  is  only  then  that 
it  reaches  the  knowledge  of  God.  He  has  heard  it  from  all  eter- 
nity, and  He  has  ordained  the  world  expressly  in  favor  of  this  prayer; 
so  that  its  fulfilment  is  a  consequence  of  the  natural  course  of  events." 
This  last  thought  meets  all  the  vain  difficulties  raised  on  this  subject. 
Ward,  Theism,  II.,  p.  158.     Gilbert,  Miracles  and  Prayer. 

It  is  well  to  remark  here  that  we  do  not  regard  as  miracles  extraor- 
dinary graces  obtained  by  prayer,  but  which  are  the  effect  of  physical 
forces  which  God  has  prepared  from  the  beginning  with  the  intention 
of  answering  the  prayers  which  should  be  addressed  to  Him.  When, 
in  answer  to  public  prayers,  a  plentiful  rain  puts  an  end  to  a  long 
drought,  it  may  be  a  striking  favor  and  a  visible  protection  of  Provi- 
dence, but  as  it  is  the  effect  of  natural  agents,  and  not  a  derogation' 
of  the  laws  of  nature,  it  does  not  manifest  direct  and  immediate 
action  on  the  part  of  God,  and  is  not  a  miracle.  Rickaby,  Cambr. 
Conf.  I.  Ser.,  n.  21.  On  Christian  Science,  the  unchristian  theory  of 
"favors  by  prayer,"  see  Dr.  Hart  in  S.  S.  L.,  vol.  I.,  essay  2;  M.  S. 
H.,  Aug.  1901;  The  Deadly  Error  of  Ch.  Science  (Philad.). 


DIVINITY   OF   THE    CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  169 

authority  of  one  of  His  ambassadors,  or  the  sanctity  of  one 
of  His  servants,  or  His  own  divinity.  Now  nothing  can  do 
this  more  effectually  than  a  miracle.  Man  is  too  famihar 
with  the  ordinary  marvels  of  nature  to  think  of  them  in 
connection  with  their  Author;  to  make  him  recognize  the 
presence  and  action  of  the  Creator,  his  attention  must  be 
awakened  and  impressed  by  a  derogation  of  the  laws  of 
nature.  ''Miracles,"  St.  Augustine  tells  us,  speaking  of  the 
multiplication  of  the  loaves,  ''are  divine  works  which  are 
performed  to  raise  the  human  mind  to  the  knowledge  of 
God  by  means  of  sensible  acts.  There  are  few  who  deign  to 
observe  the  truly  admirable  and  astonishing  works  of  Provi- 
dence in  the  smallest  grain  of  wheat,  hence  God,  in  His 
infinite  mercy,  has  reserved  certain  things  outside  the  ordinary 
course  and  order  of  nature  to  be  produced  at  opportune  times, 
in  order  that  the  marvellousness  of  a  spectacle,  not  greater 
but  unusual,  shall  awaken  the  astonishment  of  men  upon 
whom  daily  marvels  make  no  impression.  And  in  fact 
it  is  a  greater  miracle  to  govern  the  entire  world  than  to  feed 
five  thousand  men  with  five  loaves  of  bread;  the  first,  how- 
ever, excites  no  astonishment,  while  we  are  filled  with  ad- 
miration of  the  second,  not  because  it  is  greater,  but  because 
it  is  more  rare."  ^ 

6.  God  is  no  way  Hke  a  workman  who,  after  he  has  con- 
ceived and  fashioned  a  complicated  instrument,  may  touch 
sometimes  a  wheel,  sometimes  a  spring,  sometimes  a  lever, 
either  at  his  pleasure  or  caprice,  or  to  remedy  an  unforeseen 
defect.  God  never  alters  His  designs  and  has  no  need  to 
revise  His  work ;  but  He  has  need  to  show  that  He  is  absolute 
Master  of  His  work,  and  for  this  purpose  He  makes  special 
use  of  miracles:  it  is  in  every  way  worthy  of  the  sovereign 
Master  of  all  things  to  confirm  His  word  by  extraordinary 
effects  of  His  infinite  power. 

c.  Let  us  add  that  miracles,  necessarily  rare,  and  exceptions 

^  On  the  moral  end  of  miracles,  read  Bossuet's  admirable  Discourses 
on  Universal  History,  pt.  ii.,  ch.  1. 


170  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

to  general  laws,  can  in  no  way  disturb  the  harmony  of  creation 
or  interfere  with  the  study  of  science :  though  at  the  word  of  a 
thaumaturgus  a  man  born  blind  is  restored  to  sight,  or  a  dead 
man  comes  forth  from  the  tomb,  it  will  not  prevent  nature 
from  following  its  habitual  course  and  mankind  will  remain 
subject  to  sickness  and  death.  The  following  from  Bergier 
may  serve  as  a  summary  of  this  whole  matter: 

''No  one  can  doubt  the  possibility  of  a  miracle,  once  he 
admits  that  it  is  God  who  created  the  world,  that  He  did 
it  of  His  own  free  will  and  in  virtue  of  His  infinite  power. 
In  fact,  according  to  this,  the  only  true  hypothesis,  God 
regulates  the  order  and  march  of  the  universe;  He  has 
established  the  connection  which  we  perceive  between 
physical  causes  and  their  effects — a  connection  for  which  we 
can  assign  no  other  reason  than  the  will  of  God;  He  has 
given  to  the  different  agents,  according  to  His  good  pleasure, 
the  various  degrees  of  force  and  activity  which  it  pleased  Him 
to  bestow;  all  that  happens  is  an  effect  of  this  supreme  will, 
and  the  order  of  the  universe  would  be  different  had  He 
willed  it  other  than  it  is.  In  decreeing  from  all  eternity 
that  a  dead  man  should  remain  without  life,  that  wood 
should  be  consumed  by  fire,  God  has  not  deprived  Himself 
of  the  power  of  derogating  these  two  laws,  of  restoring  fife 
to  a  dead  man,  of  preserving  a  bush  in  the  midst  of  flames, 
when  He  wills  thus  to  awaken  the  attention  of  men,  to  in- 
struct them,  or  to  convey  His  positive  precepts. 

"If  He  has  done  this  at  certain  periods,  it  is  clear  that  the 
exception  to  the  general  law  was  as  undoubtedly  foreseen  and 
determined  by  God  from  all  eternity  as  the  law  itself;  and 
that  thus  the  law  and  the  exception  in  such  a  case  are  the 
effect  of  the  w^isdom  and  the  will  of  God,  since,  before  creating 
the  world,  God  knew  what  He  willed  to  do  and  what  He 
would  do  throughout  future  ages.  ...  It  was  with  fullest 
liberty  and  unconstrained  by  necessity  that  God  established 
a  certain  order  in  nature;  He  was  free  to  regulate  it  otherwise. 
He  had  only  to  decree  that  from  the  dust  of  the  human  body 


DIVINITY  OF  THE   CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  171 

buried  in  the  earth  another  man  should  spring,  after  the 
manner  of  the  oak  from  the  acorn.  The  resurrection  of  the 
dead,  therefore,  is  not  a  phenomenon  which  transcends  the 
divine  power.  When  God  raises  a  man  from  the  dead  it 
argues  no  change  in  the  divine  will,  which  has  resolved  from 
all  eternity  to  restore  him  to  life  and  thus  derogate  a  general 
law.  Nor  can  this  exception  be  said  to  destroy  the  law 
since  it  follows  its  wonted  course  in  the  case  of  all  other 
men.  A  resurrection,  finally,  interferes  in  no  way  with  the 
established  order,  or  impugns  the  eternal  wisdom  which 
created  this  order.'' ' 


Possibility  of  Verifying  a  Miracle. — There  are  ad- 
versaries of  Christianity  who,  unable  to  deny  the  pos- 
sibility of  miracles,  endeavor  to  accomplish  the  same  end 
by  another  means,  and  claim  with  Rousseau  that  it  is  at 
least  impossible  to  verify  a  miracle;  but  this  new  attempt 
is,  as  we  shall  demonstrate,  as  fruitless  as  the  first. 

For  the  perfect  establishment  of  a  miracle  it  is  only  neces- 
sary to  prove  two  points:  1st,  the  existence  of  the  fact  itself; 
2d,  the  miraculous  nature  of  the  fact.  Now  we  affirm  that 
in  certain  cases  this  double  verification  is  possible  and  easy.^ 

We  say  in  certain  cases,  for  we  by  no  means  claim  that  all 
miracles  may  be  verified  in  themselves:  have  we  not  already 
said  that  certain  miracles,  like  the  eucharistic  transubstantia- 
tion,  are,  because  of  their  suprasensible  nature,  incapable 
of  palpable  proof?  As  to  miraculous  facts  which  come  under 
the  senses,  it  is  clear  that  there  may  be  cases  which  it  is 
difficult  for  the  unlettered,  or  even  for  scholars  themselves,  to 
verify.  But  let  us  remark  that  the  affirmation  of  our  adver- 
saries is  general;  if  a  fact  is  miraculous,  they  maintain  that 
it  is  necessarily  beyond  our  power  of  investigation. 

*  Consult  on  this  subject  the  conference  of  Frayssinous  on  miracles. 
'  Bumet,  Path  which  Led  a  Protestant  Lawyer  to  the  Catholic 
Church,  ch.  6. 


172  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

Thesis. — There  are  Miracles  of  the  Existence  of  Which  we  may 
(I)  Have  Certain  Knowledge;  {II    the  Miraculous  Nature  of 
Which  loe  may  Discern  Scientifically  or  Philosophically. 

1st.  Since  a  miracle  is  a  sensible  fact,  it  may  be  known,  like 
all  facts  of  this  kind,  either  by  the  testimony  of  the  senses 
or  by  ordinary  human  testimony.  To  be  certain,  for  ex- 
ample, that  a  man  walks  upon  the  waters  of  the  sea,  that  a 
leper  is  instantly  healed,  that  a  dead  man  is  raised  to  life,  do 
we  need  anything  more  than  sound  organs?  To  be  sure  that 
the  body  of  Lazarus,  first,  was  in  a  state  of  decay,  and  that  it 
was  afterward  restored  to  perfect  life,  did  the  witnesses  need 
any  better  organs  than  would  suffice  to  convince  them  of 
life  and  of  death  in  the  case  of  any  man?  We  must  remark 
that  what  we  verify  by  means  of  the  senses  is  the  act  itself 
as  it  falls  under  the  senses,  and  not  the  supernatural  char- 
acter or  miraculous  origin  of  the  act;  the  latter  is  a  matter 
of  reasoning,  it  is  a  rational  conclusion. 

2d.  There  are  also  cases  where  it  is  very  evident  that  a 
phenomenon  is  beyond  all  the  natural  forces  operating  at  the 
time  it  is  produced.  In  such  instances  one  does  not  need  to  be 
an  academician  to  recognize  that  the  miracle  is  of  divine 
origin.  Is  there  any  one,  for  example,  who  is  not  absolutely 
certain  that  it  is  not  natural  for  the  dead  to  come  back  to 
life?  If  you  were  told  that  the  day  will  come  when  a  man 
may  by  natural  power,  by  a  simple  word,  give  life  to  a  de- 
caying corpse,  would  there  not  arise  in  you  a  protest  stronger 
than  all  scientific  systems,  the  protest  of  nature  and  common 
sense?  Is  it  necessary  to  be  a  physicist,  a  physiologist,  or  a 
chemist  to  be  certain  that  it  is  impossible  to  feed  five  thousand 
men  with  five  loaves  and  two  fishes?  that  a  deep-seated 
ulcer  is  not  cured  by  a  verbal  command?  If,  at  the  voice  of 
one  speaking  in  the  name  of  God,  I  see  a  man  who  has  been 
dead  four  days  come  forth  from  the  tomb  in  perfect  life,  it 
would  be  impossible  for  me  to  attribute  this  effect  to  any 
natural  cause,  known  or  unknown,  for  it  is  an  effect  diametri- 
cally opposed  to  the  most  certain  and  imiversally  acknowl- 


DIVINITY   OF   THE   CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  173 

edged  laws.  Yes,  as  long  as  it  cannot  be  proved  that  a 
physician  by  a  simple  act  of  his  will  is  capable  of  restoring 
a  dead  man  to  life,  or  that  the  imagination  is  sufficient  to 
knit  a  fractm-ed  limb  immediately,  to  restore  sight  to  a  man 
born  blind,  to  still  a  tempest  instantly,  I  am  sure  of  being 
able  to  prove  the  miraculous  character  of  a  fact  which  I 
witness  or  which  is  verified  by  unimpeachable  testimony. 

To  claim,  as  Renan  dares  to  do,  that  a  miracle,  to 
merit  belief,  must  take  place  in  an  amphitheatre  under  the 
eyes  of  the  best  physicians,  physiologists,  physicists,  and 
chemists,  before  a  commission  of  specialists  allowed  to 
choose,  for  example,  the  body  that  is  to  be  restored  to  life, 
and  to  regulate  the  programme  of  the  experiment;  to  claim, 
in  a  word,  that  God,  if  He  wishes  to  be  believed,  must  place 
Himself  entirely  at  their  disposition,  and  repeatedly,  like  a 
hired  magician,  produce  the  phenomenon  before  their  eyes, 
is  as  impious  as  it  is  absurd.  With  such  a  claim  no  death 
certificate  could  be  issued  without  a  previous  verdict  of  a 
commission  in  which  all  the  academies  must  be  represented. 

Objection. — Since  a  miracle  is  an  effect  for  which  we 
can  assign  no  natural  cause,  to  be  able  to  pronounce  an  event 
miraculous  we  must  know  all  the  laws  of  nature  without 
exception;  for  one  law  of  which  we  are  ignorant  may  in 
certain  cases,  unknown  to  the  spectators,  change  the  effect  of 
all  the  others.  Now  no  one  can  flatter  himself  that  he  knows 
all  the  forces  of  nature  and  the  various  combinations  of 
which  they  are  susceptible.  Hence  it  is  always  impossible 
to  pronounce  with  certainty  in  regard  to  a  miracle. 

Answer. — 1st.  a.  This  objection,  formulated  by  J.  J.  Rous- 
seau, is  no  doubt  specious;  hence  certain  rationalists  present 
it  as  irrefutable.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  it  has  no 
value  whatever  with  soimd  reason.  It  only  proves  that  one 
must  not  affirm  the  supernatural  character  of  an  event 
before  having  thoroughly  examined  all  the  circumstances 
under  which  it  happened.  But  it  could  not  prove  the 
impossibility  of  ascertainmg  the  supernatural  character  of  a 


174  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

miracle  unless  the  laws  of  nature  worked  capriciously.  But 
there  is  nothing  less  capricious  than  these  laws.  It  is  the 
very  character  of  a  natural  law  to  produce  the  same  effects 
under  the  same  circumstances.  Consequently  from  the 
moment  we  know  that  the  circumstances  are  identical,  a 
matter  most  easily  proved  in  hundreds  of  cases,  we  are 
absolutely  certain  that  a  determinate  phenomenon  will  natu- 
rally follow. 

h.  The  universe,  which  is  the  work  of  infinite  wisdom, 
forms  a  harmonious  whole,  ruled  by  laws  which  cannot  oppose 
or  destroy  one  another:  this  would  be  disorder.  Hence,  if 
a  determined  event  manifestly  contradicts  a  single  known 
law  of  nature,  it  is  superfluous,  nay,  absurd,  to  seek  an  ex- 
planation of  it  in  another  law.  The  whole  and  sole  explana- 
tion of  it  must  be  sought  in  the  free  will  and  almighty 
power  of  God,  who  proclaims  by  a  miracle  His  sovereignty 
over  nature. 

2d.  The  object  of  this  objection  is  to  frustrate  the  con- 
clusive evidence  of  the  miracles  performed  by  Our  Lord, 
and  thus  destroy  His  authority,  that  is,  cast  doubts  upon 
the  divinity  of  His  mission.  It  is  an  easy  matter  to  demon- 
strate that  it  fails  of  its  end.  In  effect  it  supposes  that  a 
fact  reputed  miraculous  may  be  caused  by  a  force  so  com- 
pletely concealed  in  nature  as  to  escape  the  observation 
of  scientists  themselves.  It  would  follow,  then,  that  this 
same  force,  hidden  as  it  is,  was  so  well  known  to  Our  Saviour 
that  He  clearly  foresaw  and  confidently  announced  the 
precise  effect  it  would  produce  at  a  given  time.  Hence 
this  objection  supposes  that  a  quantity  of  forces  unknown 
to  all,  even  to  scientists,  have  constantly  produced,  as 
Jesus  foresaw,  effects  contrary  to  those  which  they  as  con- 
stantly produce  on  all  other  occasions.  Whence  could 
Jesus,  the  carpenter  of  Nazareth,  hold  exclusive  knowledge 
of  a  science  so  vast,  so  absolutely  certain,  if  not  from  the 
inexhaustible  source  of  all  knowledge,  from  God?  It  is 
evident,  therefore,  that  such  an  objection  only  changes  the 


DIVINITY   OF   THE   CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  175 

character  of  the  Saviour's  miracles,  and  that  if  we  deny 
this  man  miraculous  power  we  are  forced  to  grant  Him 
miraculous  knowledge. 

3d.  If,  in  order  to  be  certain  that  a  sensible  effect  has  no 
possible  cause  in  the  forces  of  nature,  it  is  necessary  to  know 
all  these  forces,  then  the  conduct  of  man  on  all  occasions 
and  in  the  gravest  circumstances  of  life  is  truly  inexplicable. 
For  example,  he  inters  his  dead  with  no  certainty  that  they 
will  not  come  back  to  life.  And  this  has  been  the  universal 
custom  of  humanity  in  all  ages.  For  who  would  dare  to 
claim  that  he  knows  all  the  forces  of  nature  and  their  possi- 
ble combinations?  Who  knows,  consequently,  whether  a 
hidden,  unknown  force  may  not  at  any  moment  instantly 
restore  life  to  a  dead  body?  When  this  learned  academician, 
who  had  the  misfortune  to  lose  his  only  son,  was  following 
the  body  to  its  last  resting-place,  was  there  any  doubt  in 
his  mind  as  to  the  possibility  of  its  naturally  returning 
to  life?  Certainly  not;  and  yet  would  he  venture  to  assert 
that  he  knows  all  the  forces  of  nature  and  all  their  imag- 
inable combinations?  In  confiding  these  dear  remains 
to  the  earth  he  is,  alas,  only  too  certain  that  all  hope  is 
over  for  him,  and  that  no  human  effort  can  restore  to  him 
the  son  whom  he  mourns.  We  see  that  to  claim  that  it  is 
impossible  to  verify  a  miracle  without  knowing  all  the 
laws  of  nature  is  to  mock  mankind,  for  the  example  we 
have  just  given  may  be  multiplied  indefinitely.  Hence 
we  may  have  a  perfect  knowledge  of  certain  forces  in  nature 
and  their  undoubted  effects,  though  we  do  not  know  all 
the  natural  forces  and  their  various  combinations.^ 

*  No  doubt  we  often  hesitate  to  pronounce  a  verdict  in  regard  to 
certain  facts  of  a  marvellous  nature;  so  we  say  we  must  be  cautious 
when  there  is  question  of  a  miracle,  and  accept  it  only  with  good 
evidence.  But  what  does  this  prove  against  miracles?  Absolutely 
nothing.  Prudence  is  necessary  in  a  great  many  other  things.  There 
are  moments  when,  if  we  were  asked  to  say  whether  it  is  night  or  day, 
we  could  not  always  answer  categorically,  and  in  certain  circumstances 
opinions  on  the  subject  would  be  divided.     Yet  no  one  would  claim 


176  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

4th.  If  we  can  never  pronounce  in  regard  to  a  miracle 
without  full  knowledge  of  all  the  forces  in  nature,  neither 
can  we  affirm  of  any  phenomenon  that  it  is  the  result  of  a 
certain  law  we  have  formulated,  since  it  may  be  produced 
by  some  natural  force  of  which  we  are  ignorant.  In  this  case 
all  natural  science  becomes  impossible.  In  fact  the  very 
object  of  the  natural  sciences  is  to  establish  and  formulate 
the  certain  and  constant  laws  of  natural  phenomena.  If 
the  objection  were  serious,  who  would  dare  to  affirm  the 
existence  of  any  law,  when  the  phenomena  announced 
as  its  invariable  result  might  be  coimteracted  by  another 
force  concealed  in  nature?  Yet  we  see  physicists,  chemists, 
and  astronomers  formulate  such  laws  with  every  assurance, 
although  they  do  not  know  all  the  forces  in  nature.  With 
the  same  legitimate  assurance  we  claim  a  resurrection  from 
the  dead  to  be  a  miracle,  for,  without  knowing  all  the  laws 
of  nature,  we  are  sure  that  a  lifeless  body  cannot  naturally 
return  to  life.  To  declare  that  a  certain  article  of  the  code 
has  been  violated  one  need  not  know  the  whole  collection 
of  laws.  We  see  that  the  objection  urged  against  miracles 
impugns  the  very  science  in  the  name  of  which  it  is  pre- 
sented. We  have  reason  to  be  proud  of  our  faith  when  it 
is  so  clearly  evident  that  the  attacks  directed  against  it  are 
equally  subversive  of  moral  and  social  laws,  of  all  science, 
and  of  reason  itself. 

5th.  This  objection  rests  mainly  on  an  error  in  regard  to 
the  requisite  degree  of  certainty;  it  was  in  anticipation  of 
this  error  that  we  spoke,  on  page  46  ff.,  of  the  criterion  of  cer- 
tainty and  of  the  various  means  by  which  certainty  may  be 
obtained.  There  is  an  absolute  certainty  which  commands 
the  assent  of  the  mind  and  excludes  even  the  possibility  of 
doubt.  Thus  it  is  absolutely  impossible,  for  one  who  under- 
stands the  terms,  to  doubt  the  truth  of  these  propositions: 
A  triangle  has  three  sides;  twice  three  is  equal  to  three 

that  it  is  always  impossible  to  make  this  distinction  between  the 
full  light  of  day  and  the  darkness  of  night. 


DIVINITY   OF   THE    CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  177 

times  two;  the  whole  is  greater  than  one  of  its  parts.  The 
same  certainty  exists  in  regard  to  my  own  existence,  and 
even  in  regard  to  the  existence  of  other  men,  and  of  the 
universe,  and  of  a  number  of  phenomena  which  fall  directly 
under  my  senses. 

But  when  there  is  question  of  certain  exterior  facts,  of 
the  existence  of  Caesar,  for  example,  of  the  conquests  of 
Charlemagne  or  of  Napoleon,  I  am  also  certain;  but  this 
certainty,  however  great,  does  not  exclude  the  possibility 
of  doubt,  it  only  makes  doubt  unreasonable.  It  is  the 
same  wdth  innumerable  practical  truths  upon  which  our 
daily  actions  and  our  whole  social  life  depend.  Is  it  abso- 
lutely certain  that  the  sun  will  rise  to-morrow?  that  I 
belong  to  a  certain  nationality?  that  I  am  of  sound  mind? 
that  those  whom  I  call  my  parents  or  my  brothers  are  really 
such?  that  such  a  possession  is  really  mine?  Is  the  contrary 
absolutely  impossible  or  does  it  imply  contradiction?  Cer- 
tainly not;  yet  I  very  properly  act  without  any  doubt  in 
this  respect.  The  reason  of  this  is  that  in  the  majority 
of  cases  truths  of  this  kind  present  themselves  so  clearly 
to  the  mind  that  we  cannot  refuse  our  assent  without 
contradicting  nature  and  subverting  the  intellectual,  moral, 
and  social  constitution  of  man.  Certainty,  again,  may 
exist  where  doubt  is  rigidly  possible;  but  if  doubt  here  is 
not  a  formal  contradiction,  as  in  the  case  of  absolute  cer- 
tainty, it  is  great  folly,  for  it  is  resisting  the  spontaneous 
conviction  of  the  common  sense  natural  to  all  men.  Thus 
it  implies  no  absolute  contradiction  to  doubt  the  conquests 
of  Alexander  or  the  existence  of  New  York,  but  in  doing 
so  we  despise  the  dictates  of  reason.  If  this  certainty,  which 
suffices  in  all  the  natural  sciences,  and  which  guides  men 
generally  in  all  the  acts  of  social  and  rational  life,  is  per- 
sistently claimed  by  some  to  be  only  a  great  probability,  it 
is  merely  a  question  of  words  with  which  we  have  no  need 
to  concern  ourselves,  for  this  kind  of  probability,  Buffier 
says,  is  regarded  by  mankind  as  certainty,  and  to  refuse  to 


178  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

accept  it  as  such  is  to  be  wanting  in  common  sense.  Now, 
a  miracle  being  a  sensible  fact,  it  cannot  be  proved  with 
absolute  certainty,  excluding  even  the  possibility  of  doubt; 
but,  like  all  exterior  facts,  it  may  be  established  by  the 
evidence  of  which  we  have  just  spoken — the  evidence  with 
which  men  are  necessarily  satisfied  even  in  the  gravest 
events  of  life,  and  upon  which  scientists  themselves  formu- 
late the  laws  of  science.^ 

Remarks. — 1st.  The  following  reflections  will  convince  us 
that  it  is  possible  to  distinguish  true  miracles  from  the 
illusions  or  marvels  which  may  be  the  work  of  the  Evil  One. 

a.  Whatever  the  natural  faculties  of  the  prince  of  dark- 
ness, or  the  quahties  of  which  his  fall  has  not  robbed  him, 
it  is  certain  that  this  enemy  of  God  can  do  nothing  without 
the  permission  of  the  sovereign  Master  of  all  creatures. 
Now  the  truth,  the  goodness,  the  sanctity  of  God  cannot 
permit  this  fallen  angel  to  imitate  the  divine  works  in  such 
a  way  as  to  lead  man  invincibly  into  error,  and  thus  drive 
him  to  eternal  ruin.  We  say  invincibly;  for  God,  having 
endowed  man  with  reason,  does  not  dispense  him  from  the 
obligation  of  exercising  that  faculty  in  order  to  guard  against 
illusions. 

b.  There  are  certain  marks,  both  positive  and  negative, 
which  enable  us  to  distinguish  true  miracles,  or  those  wrought 
by  divine  power,  from  the  marvels  produced  by  the  Evil 
One.  If,  for  example,  the  miracle  is  accompHshed  in  the 
name  of  God,  or  if  it  has  been  foretold  by  genuine  proph- 
ecy, or  if  it  is  performed  in  confirmation  of  a  doctrine  fitted 
in  every  way  to  lead  men  to  serve  God  better,  etc.,  it  can- 
not come  from  the  Evil  One.  One  thing  particularly  incon- 
testable is  that  the  Evil  One  cannot  be  the  author  of  the 
miracles  performed  by  Our  Lord  and  His  disciples,  for  they 

^  Cf.  references  pp.  39,  49.  "  I  maintain  that  many  a  man  has  been 
hung  in  England,  and  justly  hung,  on  the  evidence  of  illiterate  per- 
sons, in  no  way  better  educated  or  better  apt  to  observe  the  things 
that  passed  before  their  eyes,  than  were  Peter  and  Matthew  and 
John."     Rickaby,  1.  c. 


DIVINITY   OF   THE    CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  179 

were  wrought  against  him,  and  he  would  not  fight  against 
himself.  Now  these  miracles  suffice  for  our  purpose.  If, 
on  the  contrary,  the  effect  of  miracles  is  to  violate  the  pre- 
cepts of  modesty  or  to  accredit  an  immoral  doctrine,  they 
cannot  be  attributed  to  God.  The  doubtful  character  of 
the  agents  employed  by  the  spirit  of  darkness  in  miracles, 
the  undignified,  grotesque  methods  to  which  they  habitually 
resort,  usually  make  it  easy  to  divine  the  origin  of  their 
marvels. 

c.  There  are,  moreover,  miracles,  called  of  the  first  order, 
which  transcend  the  power  of  all  created  beings,  visible  or 
invisible,  and  which  absolutely  require  the  immediate  inter- 
vention of  God  Himself,  as,  for  example,  the  resurrection 
of  the  dead.  Now  such  facts  are  not  lacking  in  the 
Gospel. 

d.  Let  us  say  further  that  we  have  no  certain  knowledge 
even  of  the  existence  of  evil  spirits,  except  through  Reve- 
lation, which  is  in  itself  a  great  miracle. 

2d.  Outside  of  Christianity  extraordinary  facts  are  related 
which  would  seem  to  require  divine  intervention.^  Such  are, 
in  paganism,  the  feats  ascribed  to  Vespasian  and  to  Appo- 
lonius  of  Thyoneus,  and,  in  later  times,  the  marvels  related 
of  the  Catholic  missionaries  in  the  extreme  East,  and  of 
the  convulsionaries  who  flocked  to  the  tomb  of  the  Jansenist 
deacon  Paris.  But  in  these  remarkable  events,  which  are 
a  mixture  of  illusion  and  imposture,  and  frequently  of 
questionable  morahty,  the  superhuman  element,  if  it  enters 
at  all,  is  so  weak  that  it  requires  only  the  intervention  of 
any  spiritual  being.  In  any  case  there  is  no  analogy  be- 
tween equivocal  marvels  of  this  kind  and  the  numerous 
and  striking  miracles  related  in  the  Gospel.  What  can  be 
compared,  for  example,  to  the  multiplication  of  the  loaves, 
to  the  resurrection  of  Lazarus,  to  the  cure  of  the  man  born 
blind,  to  the  walking  upon  the  waters,  to  the  stilling  of  the 
tempest?    The  works  of  Christ  have  all  the  same  character 

*  Newman  on  Miracles,  pt.  ii. ;  Historic  Sketches,  I. 


180  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

of  divine  power,  simplicity,  and  goodness.  There  is  in  them 
nothing  bizarre,  no  ostentation  or  vain  show,  no  design  to 
astonish  the  crowd  or  strike  it  with  terror.  Let  us  observe 
also  that  the  miracles  of  the  Gospel  bear,  directly  or  in- 
directly, upon  the  admirable  dogmatic  and  moral  teaching 
of  Our  Saviour,  while  the  other  events  mentioned  rarely 
have  any  laudable  end. 

3d.  We  have  no  need  to  dwell  here  upon  spirit-rapping 
and  the  general  manifestations  of  the  SpirituaHsm  of  the 
present  day,  which  is  a  renewal  of  paganism.^     Let  us  only 
observe,  with  authors  versed  in  the  subject,  that  though 
much  of  it  is  fraud  and  prestidigitation,  yet  many  marvels 
connected  with  it  are  so  well  established  by  historical  truth 
that  we  cannot  reasonably  doubt  them.     It  is  no  less  certain, 
however,  that  spiritualism  is  a  shameful  and  very  danger- 
ous superstition.     Let  us  content  ourselves  with  quoting  a 
few  words  of  Mgr.  d'Annibale,  who  sums  up  the  history  of 
table-moving    and    American    Spiritualism.     After    stating 
the  principal  facts  of  SpirituaHsm  he  adds:  '^They  who  take 
it  up  as  an  amusement  flatter  themselves  that  these  spirits 
are  no  other  than  the  souls  of  the  dead.     They  are  mis- 
taken: they  are  devils;  St.  Augustine  and  St.  Chrysostom 
affirm  it,  and  pagans  themselves.  Porphyrins  for  example, 
have  recognized  and  acknowledged  it;  one  must  have  lost 
his  reason  to  doubt  it."    We  shall  also  find  many  excellent 
things  on  this  question  of  Spirituafism  and  the  others  of 
which  we  have  just  spoken  in  Bonniot's  work,  "  Le  miracle 
et  ses  contrefagonsJ^ 

4th.  This  might  be  the  place  to  speak  of  the  wonders  of 
hypnotism,^  particularly  of  the   cures   effected  by  sugges- 

^  Gmeiner,  Spirits,  etc.;  Tyrrell,  Faith  of  Millions,  II.  Ser.,  n.  21 ;  The 
Danger  of  Spiritualism  (St.  Louis);  Br.  W.  ix.  332,  352;  C.  W.  xviii. 
145,  318,  606;  M.  Ixvi.  1,  200}  Ixxxi.  34;  A.  C.  Q.  vi.,  vii.  208,  viii. 
153;  D.  R.;  Old  Ser.  xxiv.  408,  New  Ser.  iv.  525,  ix.  253,  Jan.  '99. 

^  D.  R.,  III.  Ser.  xxv.  241.  On  the  Moral  Aspect  of  Hypnotism 
see  Dolphin  and  A.  E.  R.,  Sept.  1902;  L  E.  R.,  Apr.  '99.  On  Theos- 
ophy  see  Clarke;  also  D,  R.,  Apr.  '92,  p.  337. 


DIVINITY  OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  181 

tion  or  otherwise;  but  the  scientific  character  of  the  ques- 
tion is  not  sufficiently  advanced  to  occupy  our  attention 
here.  Let  us  be  satisfied  to  observe  that  we  may  apply  to 
these  wonders  many  things  mentioned  in  the  preceding  re- 
marks, particularly  what  was  said  in  refutation  of  the  ob- 
jection founded  on  the  hidden  forces  of  nature.  Moreover, 
we  can  find  no  trace  of  hypnotic  methods  in  the  innumerable 
maladies  other  than  nervous  which  Jesus  cured.  In  any 
case,  in  a  large  number  of  His  miracles,  notably  the  multi- 
pHcation  of  the  loaves,  the  stilling  of  the  tempest,  and  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead,  there  is  no  possible  place  for  hyp- 
notism. Now  these  miracles  abimdantly  suffice  to  prove 
the  divinity  of  Our  Saviour's  mission. 

Value  of  Miracles  Regarded  as  Proof. — A  miracle  is 
an  authentic  confirmation  of  the  doctrine  in  favor  of  which 
it  is  produced. 

a.  A  miracle  is  a  derogation  of  the  laws  of  nature;  hence 
it  can  have  no  other  author  than  God,  the  author  and  master 
of  nature.  Now  God  cannot  lend  His  almighty  power  to 
further  imposture  or  error.  Hence  when  a  man  proposes 
a  doctrine  as  coining  from  God  and  supports  it  with  a  miracle, 
it  is  God  Himself  who  marks  this  doctrine  with  the  seal  of 
His  authority.  This  man,  therefore,  cannot  be  an  impostor, 
and  the  doctrine  which  he  teaches  is  necessarily  true.  It 
is  in  this  sense  that  St.  Augustine  says:  ''Miracle  renders 
authority  sensible,  and  authority  commands  faith." 

h.  It  is,  moreover,  the  conviction  and  the  belief  of  all 
peoples  that  miracles  prove  the  divinity  of  a  mission  or  a 
religious  doctrine.  Once  it  is  confirmed  by  positive  miracle, 
man,  unless  bhnded  by  prejudice  or  passion,  no  longer  hesi- 
tates to  accept  it  as  true;  he  feels  instinctively,  and  he  is 
fully  convinced,  that  the  miracle  comes  from  God  and  is  the 
divine  seal  of  Revelation. 


182  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 


II.  Prophecy.* 


Its  Nature. — Prophecy  consists  in  announcing  in  ad- 
vance, accurately  and  positively,  actions  which  depend  on 
the  free  determination  of  God  or  man.  It  may  be  defined 
as  the  certain  prediction  of  a  future  event  which  cannot  be 
known,  through  its  natural  causes,  to  any  created  intelli- 
gence. It  is  clear  that  the  predictions  of  astronomers 
announcing  eclipses,  of  a  statesman  who  foresees  pohtical 
changes,  are  not  prophecy,  for  they  are  deduced  from  nat- 
ural causes  which  may  be  known  to  man.  The  definition 
alone  of  prophecy  shows  that  it  is  a  species  of  miracle; 
thus  God  has  given  it  as  one  of  the  chief  signs  of  the 
authenticity  of  divine  revelation.  It  is  a  form  of  miracle 
specially  fitted  for  this  end,  for  it  is  suited,  like  revelation 
itself,  to  the  capacity  of  every  intelligence. 

Possibility  of  Prophecy. — Prophecy  is  possible,  but  to 
God  only.  It  is  evident  that  no  creature  can,  by  his  un- 
aided intelligence,  know  certain  events  which  form  the  sub- 
ject of  prophecy;  but  God,  on  the  contrary,  infinite  Intel- 
ligence and  Knowledge,  necessarily  knows  all  that  will  ever 
be;  He  knows  the  future  determinations  of  free  causes,  such 
as  the  will  of  man,  as  well  as  the  future  results  of  all  nat- 
ural causes,  even  of  those  which  are  not  yet  in  existence. 
Now  what  He  knows  He  can  manifest  to  man.  He  can, 
therefore,  prophesy. 

Value  of  Prophecy  as  Proof. — A  fulfilled  prophecy  is 
a  certain  proof  of  the  divinity  of  the  revelation  in  favor  of 
which  it  was  made.    In  effect: 

1st.  It  constitutes  a  true  miracle,  and  it  has,  conse- 
quently, the  convincing  power  of  a  miracle. 

2d.  Prophecy  is  possible  only  to  God,  hence  it  is  a  sort  of 
divine  revelation;  and  as  God  cannot  confirm  error,  it  follows 

^  Maas,  S.J.,  Christ  in  Type  and  Prophecy,  introd.;  Schanz,  II.,  ch. 
11;  Hettinger,  Rev.  R.;  ch.  3. 


DIVINITY   OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  183 

that  the  whole  doctrine  of  which  this  prophecy  forms  an 
integral  part  must  come  from  God. 

3d.  Thus  all  peoples  have  given  this  meaning  to  real 
prophecy.  For  men  recognized  without  difficulty  that  if  a 
prophecy  could  confirm  a  He,  God  Himself  would  be  ac- 
countable for  leading  men  into  error. 

With  the  assistance  of  the  notions  which  we  have  just 
developed,  and  supported  by  the  Old  Testament  and  par- 
ticularly by  the  gospels,  the  historical  authority  of  which 
has  been  placed  beyond  controversy,  let  us  come  now  to  the 
essential  object  of  the  first  part  of  this  Course,  the  demon- 
stration of  the  divinity  of  the  mission  of  Jesus  Christ,  and 
consequently  of  the  rehgion  which  He  came  to  reveal  to  the 
world. 


ART.    III.— TEN    PROOFS    OF    THE    DIVINITY     OF     THE 

MISSION    OF  JESUS    CHRIST,    AND   OF  HIS   WORK,    THE 

CHRISTIAN   RELIGION. 

I.  First  Proof. 

THE  MIRACLES  PERFORMED  BY  OUR  LORD.^ 

1.  Number  of  these  Miracles. — There  are  few  pages  in 
the  Gospel  which  do  not  tell  us  of  one  or  several  miracles 
performed  by  Our  Lord.  He  truly  appears  as  the  sovereign 
Master  of  nature.  The  infirm  and  the  sick  of  all  kinds  were 
brought  to  him  in  large  numbers,  not  only  from  various  parts 
of  Judea,  but  from  Syria  and  other  neighboring  countries; 
and  Jesus  cured  them  by  a  simple  word,  or  by  the  imposition 
of  His  hand,  or  by  the  contact  of  His  garments,  or  even 
by  a  secret  virtue  which  went  out  from  Him  (Matth.  iv.; 
Luke  viii.).  He  changed  water  into  wine,  filled  the  nets  of 
His  apostles  with  a  miraculous  draught  of  fishes,  appeased 
the  fury  of  the  wind  and  the  tide,  dehvered  demoniacs  from 
the  possession  of  the  devil,  raised  the  dead  to  life.    And 

*  Wiseman,  Essays^  vol.  i. 


184  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

yet  the  evangelists  mention  only  the  marvels  most  striking 
in  themselves  or  because  of  the  circumstances  which  ac- 
companied them ;  they  are  content  to  refer  only  in  a  general 
way  to  the  others.     (John  xxi.) 

Among  the  numerous  miracles  given  in  detail  and  which 
suffice  to  make  the  life  of  Jesus  the  most  marvellous  that 
ever  appeared  on  earth,  let  us  quote  in  particular: 

A.  The  cure  of  the  'paralytic  (Matth.  ix.;  Luke  v.),  wit- 
nessed and  watched  by  the  unfriendly  Pharisees  and  Scribes. 
The  concourse  of  people,  moreover,  was  so  great  that  the 
friends  of  the  sufferer,  in  order  to  bring  him  to  Jesus,  were 
obhged  to  lower  him  through  the  roof.  (We  know  that  the 
roofs  of  the  houses  in  the  East  were  clay  terraces.) 

B.  The  two  multiplications  of  the  loaves,  which  borrow  a 
great  force  from  the  testimony  of  the  multitude  whom  Jesus 
fed  in  the  desert  with  a  few  loaves  and  a  few  fishes;  the 
fragments  gathered  each  time  after  the  repast  filled  several 
baskets  (Matth.  xiv.  and  xv.;  John  vi.). 

C.  The  cure  of  the  man  horn  blind  so  admirably  told  by 
St.  John,  ch.  ix.  The  strenuous  efforts  of  the  Pharisees  to 
disprove  this  miracle,  and  the  official  investigation  to  which 
they  subjected  the  witnesses,  confirmed  it  the  more. 

D.  Many  resurrections  from  the  dead.  Miracles  of  this 
kind  must  have  been  numerous,  to  judge  by  Our  Saviour's 
answer  to  the  disciples  (Matth.  xi.  5).  Here  the  resurrec- 
tions from  the  dead  are  placed  in  the  same  category  as  the 
heahng  of  the  sick:  the  bhnd  see,  the  dead  rise  again.  The 
Gospel  relates  specially  the  resurrection  of  the  daughter  of 
Jairus,  for  whom  the  mourners  had  already  assembled 
(Matth.  ix. ;  Mark  v. ;  Luke  viii.) ;  that  of  the  son  of  the  widow 
of  Naim,  whom  they  were  bearing  to  the  tomb  and  whom 
Jesus  restored  to  fife  with  this  sovereign  command:  ''Young 
man,  I  say  to  thee,  arise  '' ;  and  finally  that  of  Lazarus,  the 
most  remarkable  of  all.  Jesus  was  some  distance  from  Be- 
thania,  the  home  of  Lazarus;  He  arrived  there  four  days  after 
the  death  of  His  friend,  who  had  been  placed  in  the  tomb 


DIVINITY   OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  185 

after  unequi vocal  signs  that  decomposition  had  begun:  ''he 
stinketh.''  In  the  presence  of  a  large  concourse  of  witnesses 
belonging  to  the  more  enhghtened  and  educated  classes,  and 
for  the  most  part  hostile  to  Our  Saviour,  Jesus  utters  a 
command  and  Lazarus  comes  forth  instantly  from  the  tomb, 
notwithstanding  his  hands  and  feet  were  bound  with  winding- 
bands  and  his  head  was  enveloped  in  a  winding-sheet.  The 
witnesses  saw  that  the  bands  had  to  be  loosed  before  he 
could  walk.  Hence  Christ  told  them :  "  Loose  him  and  let 
him  go"  (John  xi.). 

2.  Circumstances  Connected  with  these  Miracles. — 
1st.  The  reahty  of  these  miracles  and  of  a  number  of  others 
could  be  perfectly  estabhshed,  for  they  were  performed  in 
open  day  in  the  presence  of  great  multitudes,  who  flocked 
not  only  from  all  parts  of  Judea,  but  from  the  neighboring 
countries,  to  witness  the  marvels  of  which  they  had  heard,  or 
to  experience  the  effect  of  Our  Saviour's  power;  in  the  pres- 
ence, also,  of  His  most  implacable  enemies,  the  Scribes  and 
Pharisees,  astute  men  interested  in  branding  an  imposture. 

2d.  They  were  so  palpable  and  so  striking  that  their 
miraculous  character  could  be  appreciated  as  readily  by  the 
simple  and  ignorant  as  by  the  scholars.  To  do  this  one 
only  required  the  testimony  of  the  senses  and  an  unbiassed 
mind.  Some  of  them  were  miraculous  in  themselves,  as  the 
cure  of  the  man  born  blind,  the  resurrection  of  the  dead; 
others  in  the  circumstances  which  accompanied  them,  as 
the  cures  instantly  effected  by  a  word,  by  simple  contact,  or 
even  at  a  distance. 

3d.  Moreover,  if  these  miracles,  performed  in  the  full  light 
of  day  and  so  frequently  repeated,  were  not  real,  how  can 
we  explain  the  ever-increasing  confidence  which  the  people 
manifested  in  Jesus?  Why  did  they  continue  during  several 
years  to  bring  Him  the  lepers,  the  blind,  the  deaf,  paralytics, 
demoniacs,  if  He  had  not  cured  other  sufferers? 

4th.  For  eighteen  centuries  these  mysteries  have  been 
sifted  by  the  most  minute  criticism  on  the  part  of  Christians; 


186  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

Jews,  and  pagans;  their  truth  is  triumphantly  established  by 
every  trial,  and  they  have  obtained  a  greater  and  more 
constant  assent  than  ever  has  been  accorded  in  the  world. 
The  explanations  which  rationalists  have  given  of  these 
miracles  in  order  to  set  aside  their  miraculous  character, 
are  generally  so  ridiculous  and  miserable  that  they  amount  to 
an  open  confession  of  their  utter  inability  to  banish  the 
supernatural.^  If  all  this  is  not  sufficient  to  estabUsh  a  fact 
beyond  dispute,  then,  to  be  consistent,  we  must  confess  to 
absolute  scepticism  of  historic  truth. 

Conclusion. — Miracles,  as  we  have  seen,  are  the  letters 
patent  of  one  purporting  to  be  God's  ambassador  to  men. 

Now,  1st,  Our  Lord  never  ceased  to  perform  miracles  and 
to  proclaim  that  He  was  sent  to  teach  men  the  way  of  sal- 
vation. Even  the  miracles  performed  for  the  relief  of 
human  misery,  miracles  which  abounded  in  Our  Saviour's 
life,  prove  that  one  who  could  thus  dispose  of  divine,  almighty 
power,  who  could  subject  all  nature  to  His  will,  must  be 
accredited  by  God.  It  is  evident  that  the  doctrine  which 
He  announces  in  the  name  of  God  cannot  but  be  divine, 
otherwise  God  would  authorize  what  is  false;  He  would 
confirm  the  imposture  and  the  impostor.  He  would  sanction 
a  teaching  contrary  to  truth. ^ 

Moreover,  2d,  Jesus  performed  a  large  number  of  His 
miracles  for  the  special  and  formal  purpose  of  proving  the 
mission  with  which  He  proclaimed  Himself  charged.  Let 
us  quote  a  few  of  these  miracles: 

a.  When  asked  by  the  disciples  of  John  the  Baptist 
whether  He  was  the  Messias  expected  for  the  salvation  of 
the  world,  Jesus  replied  by  citing  the  evidence  of  the  mira- 
cles which  He  performed  before  them:  ''The  blind  see  .  .  ."; 
thereby  manifestly  declaring  His  divine  mission  in  con- 
firmation of  which  He  gave  the  most  striking  miracles. 

^  For  a  splendid  refutation  of  the  theories  of  Strauss  and  Renan  see 
Picard,  pt.  ii.,  ch.  3. 
2  Lacordaire,  2d  conf .  on  Jesus  Christ;  Gigot,  Biblical  Lect.,  1. 8,  n.  3. 


DIVINITY  OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  187 

6.  When  the  Pharisees,  who,  it  would  seem,  appreciated 
the  conclusive  evidence  of  miracles,  ask  one  of  Him  as  a 
special  proof  of  His  mission,  Jesus,  who  had  unceasingly 
multiplied  such  proofs  before  them,  cites,  this  time,  the 
future  miracle  of  the  Resurrection  (Matth.  xii.). 

c.  Another  time  He  tells  them  that  if  they  find  it  diffi- 
cult to  believe  His  teaching,  to  believe  for  the  very  work's 
sake  (John  xiv.). 

d.  On  another  occasion  the  wily  Pharisees,  disturbed  by 
His  words,  said  to  Him:  ''How  long  dost  Thou  hold  our 
souls  in  suspense?  If  Thou  be  Christ,  tell  us  plainly." 
Jesus  answered  them:  "I  speak  to  you  and  you  believe 
not:  the  works  that  I  do  in  the  name  of  My  Father,  they 
give  testimony  of  Me.  .  .  .  The  works  themselves  that  I 
do,  give  testimony  of  Me,  that  the  Father  hath  sent  Me.'' 
He  added,  affirming  more  formally  not  only  His  divine 
mission,  but  the  divinity  of  His  person:  ''If  I  do  not  the 
works  of  My  Father,  believe  Me  not.  But  if  I  do,  though 
you  will  not  believe  Me,  believe  the  works:  that  you  may 
know  and  believe  that  the  Father  is  in  Me  and  I  in  the  Father. " 
(John  X.) 

e.  At  the  resurrection  of  Lazarus,  Jesus  formally  declares 
that  He  performs  the  miracle  that  the  people  may  recog- 
nize His  divine  mission  (John  xi.). 


II.  Second  Proof. 

THE   RESURRECTION   OF  JESUS   CHRIST. 

1.  The  Special  Importance  of  this  Miracle. — Among 
all  the  miracles  of  Our  Saviour  there  is  one  more  important 
than  all  the  others,  that  of  the  Resurrection.  Yes;  Our 
Lord's  Resurrection  is  of  itself  a  summary  and  peremptory 

*Ward,  Devotional  Essays,  n.  9;  Schanz,  II.,  ch.  16;  Hettinger, 
Rev.  R.,  ch.  5;  Gibbons,  Ch.  H.,  ch.  16;  Wiseman  Science,  etc.,  1.  6. 
But  see  especially  Picard,  pt.  ii.,  ch.  4;  M.  Ixvi.  195. 


188  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

demonstration  of  the  divinity  of  His  mission  and  of  His 
religion.  It  is  a  proof,  moreover,  which  has  the  advantage 
of  being  eminently  suited  to  every  intelligence:  to  imder- 
stand  it  nothing  more  is  needed  than  an  upright  heart 
which  seeks  the  truth  in  good  faith.  In  fact  it  is  incon- 
testable that  if  Our  Saviour  returned  to  life  by  His  own  power, 
He  i^  God;  and  if  it  was  by  the  power  of  God,  His  mission 
is  divine;  for  it  is  impossible  to  suppose  that  God,  whose 
sanctity,  goodness,  and  wisdom  are  infinite,  would  fulfil  the 
prediction  of  an  impostor,  and  mark  his  doctrine  with  the 
incontestable  seal  of  truth. 

Our  Lord  Himself,  in  predicting  His  Resurrection,  pre- 
sented it  as  the  most  striking  mark  of  His  divine  mission. 
The  apostles  did  the  same  in  their  preaching;  and  when 
there  was  question  of  choosing  a  disciple  to  replace  the 
traitor  Judas,  they  required  that  it  should  be  one  who  had 
witnessed  the  life,  the  death,  and  the  Resurrection  of  their 
Master  (Acts  i.  22).  St.  Paul  does  not  hesitate  to  declare 
that  the  faith  of  the  Christian  is  vain  if  Christ  did  not  rise 
from  the  dead  (1  Cor.  xv.).  Finally,  the  enemies  of  Jesus, 
the  Jews  themselves,  so  fully  appreciated  the  conclusive 
testimony  of  His  Resurrection  that  they  placed  a  guard 
at  the  sepulchre  to  render  any  deception  impossible;  and, 
in  later  times,  the  opponents  of  Revelation  left  nothing 
undone  to  destroy  faith  in  this  most  important  miracle. 

Let  us  demonstrate  that  the  fact  of  the  Resurrection  of 
Jesus  Christ,  the  divine  Founder  of  Christianity,  is  as  real, 
as  certain  as  it  is  important;  let  us  prove  that  God  has 
surrounded  it  with  so  many  guarantees  that  to  deny  it  we 
must  obstinately  close  our  eyes  to  the  light. 

2.  Historical  Statement. — Let  us  begin  by  stating 
briefly  the  principal  details  of  this  great  event  as  we  find 
them  in  the  gospels.* 

Friday,  the  eve  of  the  Sabbath,  about  three  in  the  after- 

*  See  Coleridge,  The  Works  and  Words  of  Our  Saviour,  ch.  19  (same 
in  Life  of  Our  Life,  II.,  ch.  12). 


DIVINITY   OF   THE    CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  189 

noon,  the  soldiers  came,  according  to  custom,  to  break  the 
legs  of  those  who  had  been  executed.  After  breaking  the 
legs  of  the  two  thieves,  seeing  that  Jesus  was  dead,  they  did 
not  break  His  legs,  but  one  of  the  soldiers  opened  His  side 
with  a  lance  and  immediately  there  issued  blood  and  water 
(St.  John,  an  ocular  witness  of  the  death  of  Jesus,  chap.  xix.). 
Toward  evening,  Joseph  of  Arimathea,  a  noble  councillor, 
asked  Pilate  for  the  body  of  Jesus.  Pilate  inquired  of  the 
centurion  who  had  presided  at  the  execution  whether  Jesus 
were  really  dead;  upon  being  assured  that  He  was,  he  allowed 
Joseph  to  have  the  body.  It  was  then  taken  down  from 
the  cross;  Joseph  and  another  of  Jesus'  disciples,  named 
Nicodemus,  bound  it  in  linen  cloths,  and  placed  it  with 
spices  in  a  new  sepulchre,  which  Joseph  had  had  hewn  for 
himself  in  a  rock.  Then,  after  rolling  a  large  stone  against 
the  entrance  to  the  sepulchre,  they  went  away. 

The  next  day,  which  was  the  Sabbath,  the  chief  priests  and 
Pharisees  begged  Pilate  to  place  a  guard  at  the  sepulchre. 
'^We  have  remembered,''  they  said,  'Hhat  that  seducer 
said,  while  He  was  yet  alive:  'After  three  days  I  will  rise 
again/  His  disciples  may  come  and  steal  Him  away,  and 
say  to  the  people,  He  is  risen  from  the  dead,  and  the 
last  error  shall  be  worse  than  the  first."  Pilate  bade  them 
guard  the  sepulchre  themselves,  which  they  did  by  sealing 
the  stone  and  placing  a  guard  about  it. 

Now  the  next  morning,  at  dawn,  there  was  a  great  earth- 
quake ;  an  angel  in  human  form,  whose  countenance  was  as 
lightning  and  whose  raiment  was  as  snow,  rolled  the  stone 
from  the  sepulchre  and  sat  upon  it.  The  sepulchre  was 
empty:  all  that  remained  were  the  linen  cloths  and  the 
napkin  which  had  bound  His  head,  carefully  folded.  The 
guards  fled  in  terror  to  the  chief  priests  and  related  what 
had  happened.  Upon  learning  it  they  gave  the  soldiers 
money  to  induce  them  to  say  that,  while  they  were  asleep, 
the  disciples  of  Jesus  came  and  carried  away  His  body. 

The  same  day  and  the  days  which  followed,  up  to  the  time 


190  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

of  His  Ascension,  Jesus  appeared,  at  intervals,  to  Mary 
Magdalen,  to  the  hoh^  women,  and  to  the  disciples,  sometimes 
individually,  sometimes  collectively.  He  talked  with  His 
disciples  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  gave  them  sensible 
proofs  of  the  truth  of  His  Resurrection,  eating  with  them, 
showing  them  and  even  letting  them  touch  the  wounds 
which  still  remained  in  His  hands,  His  feet,  and  His  side. 
Finally  He  appeared,  a  last  time,  on  a  mountain  of  Galilee 
to  more  than  five  hundred  of  His  disciples,  and  ascended 
before  them  into  heaven  (Matth.  xvii.;  Mark  xvi.;  Luke 
xxiv.;  John  xx.;  Acts  i.;  1  Cor.  xv.). 

This  is  a  brief  statement  of  the  evangehc  narration  upon 
which  we  shall  found  our  demonstration.  If  it  is  accurate, 
the  fact  which  it  relates  can  be  accounted  for  only  by  divine 
intervention.  This  is  so  true  that  infidels  themselves  do  not 
think  of  explaining  it  by  natural  causes,  but  they  try  to 
contest  the  reality  of  the  fact. 

3.  Certainty  of  the  Resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ. — 
The  truth  of  the  gospels  has  been  fully  estabhshed.  Hence 
we  cannot  question  the  reality  of  the  Resurrection  of  Jesus, 
which  is  given  with  so  much  detail  by  the  sacred  writers. 
It  is  well  nevertheless,  considering  the  exceptional  importance 
of  this  miracle,  to  make  it  the  object  of  a  special  discussion. 
To  prove  the  reality  of  this  resurrection,  it  is  sufficient  to 
establish:  A.  That  Our  Saviour  was  really  dead  when  He 
was  taken  down  from  the  cross;  B.  That  He  was  afterwards 
seen  fully  restored  to  hfe.  We  shall  add  nevertheless  a 
third  proof  no  less  decisive:  C.  The  impossibility  of  any 
deception. 

A.  Jesus  was  truly  dead  when  He  was  taken  down  from  the 
cross. 

a.  St.  John,  an  eye-witness,  and  the  other  evangelists 
affirm  that  He  expired  on  the  cross. 

6.  Nor  can  we  doubt  it,  if  we  consider  the  inhuman  tor- 
ments which  He  endured  before  He  was  placed  on  the  cross ; 
it  is  even  marvellous  that  He  lived  during  the  three  hours; 


DIVINITY   OF   THE   CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  191 

the  crucifixion  alone,  according  to  the  historian  Josephus,  was 
sufficient  to  cause  His  death. 

c.  The  soldiers  did  not  break  His  legs,  only  because  it  was 
so  evident  that  He  was  dead. 

d.  The  thrust  of  the  lance  would  have  extinguished  any 
remaining  breath  of  fife. 

e.  Pilate  allowed  Joseph  of  Arimathea  to  take  the  body 
only  after  the  centurion  had  officially  testified  that  Jesus 
was  really  dead. 

/.  The  Jews  themselves  were  fully  convinced  of  His  death; 
had  they  had  the  least  doubt  they  would  have  taken  pains 
to  verify  it  before  placing  the  guard  at  the  sepulchre,  and 
if  necessary  they  would  have  despatched  their  victim.  Thus 
neither  Roman  nor  Greek  sophists,  nor  the  Sanhedrim,  nor  the 
Rabbins  ever  ventured  to  say  that  Jesus  was  not  dead.  And 
even  in  our  own  day  this  miserable  hypothesis  is  rarely  used 
against  the  reality  of  the  resurrection. 

B.  Jesus  Christ  truly  rose  from  the  dead. 

a.  This  was  attested  by  numerous  eye-witnesses,  who, 
after  they  had  seen  their  divine  Master  expire  upon  the  cross, 
beheld  Him  again  in  life,  not  in  a  dream,  nor  during  sleep,  but 
in  open  day  and  when  they  were  in  full  possession  of  all 
their  faculties ;  they  heard  His  words,  received  His  commands, 
touched  and  felt  His  members  and  His  wounds,  and  even  ate 
with  Him. 

h.  During  forty  days  they  met  Jesus  under  the  most  varied 
circumstances,  near  the  tomb,  on  the  way  to  Emmaus,  in  the 
cenacle,  on  the  seashore,  on  Mount  Olivet,  etc.  At  one  time 
He  appeared  to  the  holy  women,  at  another  to  Peter,  at 
another  to  the  disciples  on  the  way  to  Emmaus;  on  one 
occasion  He  was  seen  by  the  whole  apostolic  college,  with 
the  exception  of  Thomas,  who  refused  to  believe  the  testi- 
mony of  his  brethren,  and  again  by  the  whole  college,  includ- 
ing Thomas,  who  was  convinced  by  the  evidence  of  his  senses ; 
at  another  time  he  appeared  to  seven  of  His  apostles  on  the 
shore  of  the  sea  of  Tiberias,  and  again  also  to  an  assembly  of 


192  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

more  than  five  hundred  apostles  and  disciples,  most  of  whom 
were  still  alive  when  St.  Paul  appealed  to  their  testimony 
(1  Cor.  XV.  6). 

c.  Finally,  these  men  laid  down  their  lives  in  testimony 
of  the  Resurrection  of  Jesus.  And  yet,  so  far  from  being  the 
victims  of  a  too  ready  creduhty,  they  at  first  accepted  the 
news  of  the  miracle  only  with  great  difficulty:  it  "  seemed 
to  them  as  idle  tales"  (Luke  xxiv.  11),  and  one  of  them, 
Thomas,  even  refused  to  accept  it  on  the  unanimous  testi- 
mony of  the  other  apostles,  and  protested  that  he  would 
not  beheve  until  he  could  put  his  hand  into  the  wounds  of 
Jesus. 

Thus  the  nature,  the  number,  and  the  various  circumstances 
connected  with  these  apparitions,  as  well  as  the  number  and 
variety  of  the  witnesses,  make  it  evident  that  the  fact  of  the 
resurrection  of  Our  Saviour  is  no  less  certain  than  that  of  His 
death.    This  miracle,  therefore,  is  absolutely  incontestable. 

C.  We  might  be  satisfied  with  this  decisive  demonstration. 
Nevertheless,  in  further  confirmation  of  the  truth  of  this  great 
miracle,  and  at  the  same  time  to  refute  the  usual  objection 
of  those  who  deny  it,  we  shall  show  that  the  hypothesis  that 
the  apostles  carried  away  the  body  of  their  Master  is  abso- 
lutely untenable.  To  this  end  let  us  prove :  1st.  That  they 
could  have  had  no  intention  to  carry  away  the  body.  2d. 
That  if  they  had,  they  never  could  have  succeeded  in  carrying 
it  out.  3d.  Let  us  add  that  had  they  resorted  to  fraud, 
they  never  could  have  induced  the  whole  world  to  believe 
that  Jesus  had  risen. 

1.  The  Disciples  could  have  had  no  Desire  to  Carry 
AWAY  the  Body  of  Jesus. — No  man  engages  in  a  perilous 
enterprise  without  some  determining  motive ;  still  less  would 
a  number  of  men  unite  to  carry  out  an  execrable  plot,  in 
which  they  not  only  had  no  interest,  but  which  was  against  all 
their  best  interests.  This,  however,  is  what  we  have  to 
admit  if  the  apostles  conceived  the  design  which  infidelity 
attributes  to  them. 


DIVINITY   OF   THE    CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  193 

1st.  They  would  have  acted  without  motive  of  any  kind. 
In  fact  the  apostles  beheved  in  the  proximate  resurrection 
of  their  Master,  or  they  did  not  beheve  it,  or  they  were 
doubtful. 

In  the  first  case  it  would  be  absolutely  useless  to  carry 
away  the  body.  In  the  second  case  all  that  remained  for 
them  was  to  abandon  the  cause  and  the  memory  of  a  man 
in  whom  they  no  longer  had  the  shghtest  faith.  In  the  third 
case  (which  is  true,  as  we  learn  from  the  desponding  words 
of  the  disciples  of  Emmaus,  and  the  unwillingness  of  the 
apostles  to  believe  the  Resurrection  when  it  was  announced 
to  them)  the  simplest  common  sense  would  have  made  them 
wait  the  event,  and  be  guided  by  its  consequences.  Therefore 
the  thought  of  carrying  away  the  body  of  their  Master  could 
never  have  occurred  to  the  apostles  unless— and  there  is 
nothing  to  justify  the  supposition — they  were  the  most  irra- 
tional of  men,  unless  they  were  all  equally  foohsh  and  in- 
consequent, for  they  must  have  concerted  the  plan  together. 

2d.  They  had,  on  the  contrary,  the  most  powerful  reasons 
for  not  engaging  in  such  an  enterprise: 

a.  They  saw  themselves  surrounded  by  the  enemies  of 
Jesus,  implacable  enemies  who  had  treated  Him  most  cruelly 
and  had  put  Him  to  death.  They  could  expect  from  these 
men  only  opprobrium,  tortures,  and  death. 

h.  And  they  had  to  fear  from  God,  the  avenger  of  crime, 
the  punishment  due  to  falsehood,  blasphemy,  and  impiety. 

c.  They  were,  moreover,  certain  to  fail  most  shamefully 
and  ignominiously  in  their  enterprise.  How  could  men, 
without  education,  without  influence,  without  fortune,  flatter 
themselves  that  they  could  succeed  in  the  most  insensate 
design  that  could  possibly  be  imagined,  viz.,  induce  the  whole 
world  to  adore  as  God  an  impostor  who  had  been  crucified  in 
Judea? 

d.  Finally,  if  Jesus  did  not  rise  from  the  dead  He  was 
henceforth,  in  the  eyes  of  His  disciples,  an  impostor,  the 
criminal  author  of  their  shame  and  their  misery.     Would 


194  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

they  have  been  willing  to  brave  everything  for  such  a  man 
and  to  expose  themselves  to  condign  punishment  in  this 
world  and  in  the  next? 

2.  Had  the  Apostles  Desired  to  Carry  Away  the 
Body  of  Jesus  They  could  not  have  Carried  out  their 
Desire. — To  be  convinced  of  this  we  need  only  consider 
briefly  the  nature  and  difficulties  of  such  an  enterprise. 

The  tomb  was  hewn  in  the  rock,  closed  with  a  large  stone, 
sealed  and  guarded  by  soldiers.  Now  what  means  had  the 
apostles  of  executing  such  a  design?  We  can  imagine  only 
three:  violence,  or  bribery,  or  deception.  All  three  were 
equally  impracticable. 

a.  Violence.  The  apostles,  who,  we  know,  were  shamefully 
timid,  who  fled  in  the  most  cowardly  manner  and  abandoned 
Jesus  during  His  Passion,  were  not  men  to  force  their  way 
through  a  guard  of  soldiers  and  break  public  seals.  Had 
they  done  so,  their  action  would  not  have  remained  either 
unknown  or  unpunished. 

h.  Bribery.  How  could  they  bribe  the  guards?  They  were 
poor,  and  they  would  have  had  to  win  over  the  soldiers  on 
the  very  spot  where  they  were  posted;  they  would  have  had 
to  win  them  all  without  exception,  for  if  only  one  refused 
the  bribe  it  would  be  sufficient  to  betray  them.  And  these 
soldiers,  would  they  dare  to  count  upon  one  another? 

c.  Deception.  How  much  there  was  to  make  this  means 
impossible!  How  could  they  reach  the  sepulchre?  By  a 
subterraneous  passage?  They  must  cut  it  in  the  rock  in  a 
single  night,  without  waking  any  of  the  guard,  and  then  must 
have  filled  it  up  again  on  leaving  so  that  no  trace  of  their 
work  remained.  They  must,  moreover,  have  amused  them- 
selves, while  removing  the  body,  with  stripping  it  of  the 
graveclothes,  and  carefully  folding  the  napkin  which  bound 
the  head,  and  finally  they  must  have  rolled  back  the  stone 
which  closed  the  sepulchre,  apparently  to  avoid  giving  any 
alarm.    What  a  tissue  of  absurdities! 

Did  they  go  by  the  ordinary  road  to  the  sepulchre?    Then 


DIVINITY  OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  195 

they  must  have  passed  through  the  guard,  broken  the  seals, 
rolled  back  the  stone,  and,  after  divesting  the  body  of  the 
graveclothes,  apparently  with  much  deliberation,  and  folding 
the  napkin  which  bound  the  head,  returned  with  their  prize 
by  the  way  they  came;  and  they  accomplished  all  this  so 
silently  that  they  were  completely  unobserved!  Perhaps 
the  guards  were  asleep!  Were  they  all  asleep?  Was  there 
no  one  left  to  warn  the  others  of  the  attempt  they  were  told 
to  expect?  Was  their  sleep  so  profound  that  all  this  move- 
ment about  them  in  the  silence  of  the  night  did  not  waken 
one  of  them?  But  let  us  admit  that  they  were  all  buried  in 
profound  slumber,  who  was  there,  then,  that  could  proclaim 
and  bear  witness  to  the  apostles'  theft?  Of  what  value  is 
the  testimony  of  sleeping  witnesses?  And  then  how  was  it 
that  no  search  was  made  for  the  body  thus  stolen  notwith- 
standing all  the  precautions  taken  by  the  authorities?  Why 
were  not  the  delinquent  guards  severely  punished?  Why 
did  the  Jews  feel  obliged  to  give  them  money  to  induce  them 
to  accuse  themselves  of  having  failed  in  their  duty,  and  to 
divulge  their  own  shame?  How  was  it  that  these  same 
Jews,  who  afterwards  frequently  reproached  the  apostles 
with  preaching  in  the  name  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  did  not 
simply  accuse  them  of  having  stolen  the  body  of  their  Master? 
Hardly  two  months  had  elapsed  after  the  Resurrection  before 
the  apostles  were  preaching  the  great  miracle,  yet  the  Jews 
never  attempted  to  explain  it  away,  but  contented  themselves 
with  having  the  apostles  scourged  and  commanding  them  to 
be  silent. 

Therefore  we  see  that  unbelief,  do  what  it  will,  is  invariably 
contradicted  by  its  own  false  arguments.  The  most  wretched 
of  all  sophistry  is  that  by  which  the  human  conscience  seeks 
to  evade  divine  certainty ;  for  it  is  impossible  to  contest  the 
truth  of  the  Resurrection  without  rejecting  the  evidence  of 
reason  and  common  sense. 

3.  Fraud  could  not  have  Converted  the  World. — 
Even  admitting  the  impossible  hypothesis  that  the  apostles 


196  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

wished  to  steal  the  body  of  Jesus,  and  that  they  succeeded 
in  their  insensate  enterprise,  there  remained  a  still  greater 
difficulty  which  they  could  not  have  overcome:  they  could 
never  have  convinced  the  whole  world  that  Jesus  had  risen 
and  that  He  is  God,  when  in  reality  He  was  only  a  male- 
factor condemned  by  human  justice  to  die  an  ignominious 
death  on  the  cross.  How  numerous,  in  fact,  were  the 
obstacles  to  the  success  of  such  a  project! 

1st.  All  the  accomplices,  authors,  or  abettors  of  this 
criminal  intrigue  must  have  agreed  among  themselves 
as  to  how  they  were  to  present  their  deception,  and  they 
nmst  have  pledged  themselves  to  endure  the  greatest  tor- 
tures solely  to  insure  the  impossible  success  of  an  infamous 
fraud. 

2d.  It  was  necessary,  moreover,  to  deceive  the  numerous 
disciples  who  had  taken  no  part  in  the  plot,  and  to  persuade 
them  to  believe  in  the  apparitions,  purely  imaginary,  of 
Jesus,  and  to  believe  with  a  faith  strong  enough  to  brave  the 
most  horrible  torments  and  death  itself  rather  than  admit 
the  least  doubt  of  the  reality  of  the  Resurrection. 

3d.  It  was  necessary  also  to  deceive  the  Gentiles,  who 
feared  His  severe  morality,  despised  His  poverty,  and  in- 
sulted the  folly  of  His  death  on  the  cross.  It  was  necessary 
to  deceive  the  Jews  who  hated  Jesus,  who  had  put  Him  to 
death  on  the  cross,  and  who  had  every  interest  in  branding 
the  imposture.  We  know  that  three  thousand  Jews  were 
converted  at  the  first  preaching  of  St.  Peter,  and  five  thousand 
at  the  second. 

4th.  Finally,  all  these  wonderful  effects  would  have  to 
be  produced  without  the  aid  of  miracles,  by  the  simple 
affirmation  of  these  men;  miracles  could  not  be  looked  for, 
for  God  would  not  lend  His  power  in  behalf  of  miserable 
impostors. 

Conclusion. — What  could  be  more  conclusive  e\'idence 
than  the  proofs,  particularly  when  taken  together,  which  we 
have  just  given?    What  shall  we  beheve  if  we  refuse  to 


DIVINITY    OF   THE    CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  197 

admit  a  fact  so  solidly  established  that  it  admits  of  no 
reasonable  doubt?  ^ 

Objections. — We  must  mention,  nevertheless,  a  few  of 
the  efforts  of  the  enemies  of  Christianity  to  suppress  this 
capital  miracle.  The  futihty  of  their  attempts  only  renders 
the  truth  more  striking. 

1st.  Strauss  has  taken  much  pains  to  explain  how  the  body 
of  Jesus  disappeared  from  the  tomb,  for  he  acknowledges 
that  it  is  a  burning  question.  He  has  finally  adopted  the 
most  unreasonable  solution:  he  asserts  that  the  body  re- 
mained in  the  sepulchre.  After  what  we  have  said,  it  is 
evident  that  this  is  an  explanation  contrary  to  all  the  gospels 
and  even  to  all  probability;  the  Jews,  moreover,  would  not 
have  failed  to  seize  it  in  order  to  destroy  from  the  first  all 
faith  in  the  Resurrection. 

Renan's  method  of  overcoming  the  difficulty,  though  more 
convenient,  is  hardly  less  ingenious:  he  declares  that  it  is 
useless  to  try  to  solve  the  question,  for  we  shall  never  know 
all  the  details.  This  declaration,  however,  does  not  prevent 
him  from  attempting  a  dozen  solutions:  that  the  apostles 
carried  away  the  body;  that  the  disciples  took  it  with  them 
into  Galilee ;  that  it  was  taken  away  by  the  Jews,  or  perhaps 
the  owner  of  the  garden;  that  the  folded  napkin  indicates 
that  a  woman  had  part  in  the  work.  Finally,  he  rejects  all 
these  explanations,  and  concludes  that  the  body  of  Jesus 
Christ  disappeared  by  chance! 

2d.  It  is  equally  embarrassing  to  these  sceptics  to  explain 
the  apostles'  unalterable  faith  in  the  Resurrection.  Strauss 
acknowledges  that  it  is  necessary  to  explain  it.  ''If  we  do 
not  find,"  he  says,  '*  a  means  of  explaining,  without  a  miracle, 
the  origin  of  faith  in  the  Resurrection  of  Jesus,  we  are  obliged 
to  deny  all  that  we  have  said,  and  to  renounce  our  enter- 
prise." He  rejects,  moreover,  the  hypothesis  of  imposture 
on  the  part  of  the  apostles,  and  justly  concludes  that  a 
faith  for  which  they  were  willing  to  die  could  not  be  founded 

^  See  Bourdaloue's  sermon  on  the  Resurrection. 


19S  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

on  a  falsehood.  But  when  there  is  question  of  finding  an 
acceptable  explanation,  he  goes  so  far  as  to  say  that  the 
apostles  were  deceived  by  their  imagination.  The  Resurrec- 
tion, therefore,  of  Jesus  was,  according  to  him  and  Renan, 
who  finds  the  invention  to  his  taste,  merely  an  hallucination 
on  the  part  of  the  disciples,  the  result  of  their  excited 
imagination.  ''They  were  in  a  state  of  great  excitement," 
he  says,  ' '  and  took  for  reality  what  was  merely  a  trick  of 
their  imagination." 

After  the  proofs  we  have  given  of  the  special  guarantees 
of  truth  which  the  witnesses  of  the  Resurrection  afford  us,  is 
it  further  necessary  to  reply  to  an  assertion  so  purely  gratu- 
itous? If  we  cannot  beheve  such  witnesses,  whom  can  we 
believe  ?  If  the  Resurrection  of  Jesus  has  no  other  foundation 
than  an  hallucination,  the  apostles  must  have  believed  that 
they  saw  what  they  did  not  see,  that  they  heard  what  they 
did  not  hear,  that  they  touched  what  they  did  not  touch! 
Is  not  this  diametrically  contrary  to  the  gospel  narrative? 
So  far  from  being  ready  to  believe  in  the  Resurrection,  we 
know  that  they  were  very  slow  to  accept  the  testimony  of 
the  holy  women,  or  that  of  their  brethren,  or  even  of  their 
own  senses.  The  words  of  Jesus  seemed  to  have  made  more 
impression  on  the  hatred  of  His  enemies  than  upon  the  love 
of  His  disciples.  The  first  remembered  perfectly  that  He 
had  announced  that  He  would  rise  again,  therefore  they  took 
every  means  to  prevent  a  fraudulent  fulfilment  of  the  pre- 
diction ;  the  apostles,  on  the  contrary,  seem  to  have  lost  sight 
of  these  words  of  their  Master.  When  Jesus  appeared  to 
them,  they  took  Him  for  a  spirit,  and  Our  Saviour,  to  un- 
deceive them,  had  to  make  them  touch  His  wounds  and  had 
to  eat  with  them.  Are  the  victims  of  hallucination  so  in- 
credulous and  so  difficult  to  convince  ? 

And,  mark  you,  according  to  this  hypothesis  all  of  the 
disciples,  without  exception,  must  have  been  the  victims  of 
hallucination,  even  the  desponding  disciples  of  Emmaus, 
even  the  incredulous  Thomas,  even  the  five  hundred  witnesses 


DIVINITY   OF   THE    CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  199 

of  the  Ascension  of  Jesus.  And  this  impossible  illusion 
must  have  lasted  forty  days  and  appeared  in  various  and 
very  numerous  circumstances ;  and  what  is  no  less  remarkable, 
it  must  have  suddenly  and  completely  disappeared  after  the 
Ascension ! 

Nor  is  this  all.  We  have  to  admit  that  the  removal  of  the 
stone  from  the  sepulchre  and  the  terror  of  the  guards  were 
only  an  illusion;  that  the  guards  also  were  victims  of  an 
hallucination;  that  the  earthquake,  the  empty  sepulchre, 
existed  only  in  the  imagination  of  the  disciples.  In  truth 
we  are  tempted  to  ask  whether  writers  who  advance  such 
things  are  not  testing  the  creduhty  of  their  readers. 

If  all  this  were  possible,  we  should  still  have  to  explain 
how,  if  Christianity  is  founded  upon  illusion,  the  apostles 
succeeded  in  establishing  it,  how  it  has  regenerated  the 
world,  how,  despite  all  obstacles,  it  has  been  perpetuated 
through  all  ages  down  to  our  own  time.  This  would  have  been 
a  much  greater  miracle  than  all  the  others. 

Read  in  Le  13e  Apotre,  by  Henri  Lasserre,  a  clever  refuta- 
tion of  Kenan's  system.  The  author  does  justice  to  it  by 
explaining  in  the  same  way  the  alleged  return  of  Napoleon  I. 
from  Elba.  He  applies  to  the  Hundred  Days  not  only  the 
system  of  Renan,  but  his  very  phrases,  and  thus  he  proves 
peremptorily  that  Napoleon  never  returned,  that  the  alleged 
proofs  of  this  return  exist  only  in  the  deluded  imagination  of 
the  admirers  of  the  great  conqueror  of  modern  times. 

Conclusion. — It  is,  therefore,  absolutely  certain  that  the 
evangelists  were  not  deceived  in  regard  to  the  Resurrection 
of  Jesus,  that  they  did  not  wish  to  deceive,  that  had  they 
wished  to  deceive  others  they  could  not  do  so.  Jesus,  after 
His  incontestable  death  on  the  cross,  came  forth  alive  from 
the  tomb,  as  He  announced,  in  proof  of  His  divine  mission ; 
it  follows,  therefore,  that  He  is  sent  by  God,  and  that  His 
work,  the  Christian  religion,  is  a  divine  work. 


200  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 


III.  Third  Proof. 

THE  FULFILMENT  OF  THE  PROPHECIES  CONCERNING  THE 

person  and  mission  of  jesus  christ.^ 

1.  An  Enumeration  of  Some  of  these  Prophecies. — 
Since  the  fall  of  our  first  parents,  God  had  never  ceased  to 
send  successively  numerous  prophets  to  announce  and 
describe,  with  more  and  more  detail,  the  Messias,  who  was  to 
replace  the  Mosaic  religion  with  one  more  perfect,  destined 
for  all  peoples  and  all  ages.  These  divine  ambassadors 
specify  the  time  when  the  Messias  will  appear  on  earth, 
the  family  to  which  He  will  belong,  the  city  where  He  will 
be  born.  They  give,  centuries  in  advance,  minute  details  of 
His  birth,  His  life.  His  death.  His  triumph  over  death  and 
the  world.  Let  us  mention  specially  the  celebrated  prophe- 
cies of  Jacob,  Daniel,  Aggeus,  and  Malachias,  who  appeared 
one  after  another,  specifying  more  and  more  clearly  the 
time  of  the  Messias'  coming. 

Let  us  show,  in  a  few  special  points,  how  minute  are  these 
prophetic  details  of  the  future  Redeemer. 

1st.  The  Coming  and  the  Qualities  of  the  Messias. — 
Son  of  Abraham  (Gen.  xii.),  issue  of  the  tribe  of  Juda 
(Gen.  xlix.),  through  David  (Ps.  Ixxxviii.,  Is.  xi.,  Jer.  xxiii., 
etc.),  the  Messias  expected  by  all  nations  (Gen.  xlix.,  Agg.  ii.), 
who  was  to  be  born  of  a  virgin  (Is.  vii.,  Jer.  xxxi.,  Ezech. 
xliv.),  in  the  city  of  Bethlehem  (Mich,  v.),  before  the  subju- 
gation of  the  nation  (Gen.  xlix.),  in  the  seventieth  week  of 
years  after  the  issue  of  the  edict  for  the  reconstruction  of  the 
Temple  of  Jerusalem  (Dan.  ix.),  and  before  the  destruction  of 
this  second  Temple  by  a  strange  nation  (Agg.  ii.,  Mai.  iii.). 

His  coming  will  be  preceded  by  universal  peace  (Dan.  ii., 
Ps.  Ixxi.,  Is.  ii.,  Zach.  iii.) ;  His  way  shall  be  announced  and 

*  Maas,  S.J.,  Christ  in  Type  and  Prophecy;  Veuillot,  Life  of  Christ, 
Introd.  iii.;  Didon,  Jesus  Christ,  Introd.,  n.  8;  Gaume,  Catech.  of 
Persev.,  L,  ch.  21  ff.;  Hettinger,  Rev.  R.,  ch.  6. 


DIVINITY   OF   THE   CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  201 

prepared  by  a  special  envoy  (Mai.  iii.),  whose  voice  shall 
resound  in  the  desert  (Is.  xL). 

The  Messias  will  be,  in  character  and  name,  Jesus  or 
Saviour  (Habac.  iii.,  Is.  li.,  etc.),  Emmanuel  or  God  with  us 
(Is.  vii.),  Christ  or  the  anointed  of  the  Lord  (Ps.  ii.,  xliv.. 
Is.  Ixi.,  Lam.  iv.),  the  Son  of  God  (Ps.  ii.,  Os.  xi.),  God  (Is.  ix., 
XXV.,  XXXV.,  xL,  Ps.  xliv.,  cix.,  Bar.  iii.,  Mai.  iii.),  and  hidden 
God  (Is.  xlv.),  priest  according  to  the  order  of  Melchisedech 
(Ps.  cix.),  the  Just  (Jer.  xxiii..  Wis.  ii.,  Is.  xlv.,  Ixii.,  etc.), 
the  holy  One  and  the  Saint  of  saints  (Ps.  iv.,  xv..  Is.  xii., 
Dan.  ix.).  His  name  shall  be  called  Wonderful,  Counsellor, 
God,  the  Mighty,  the  Father  of  the  w^orld  to  come,  the 
Prince  of  peace  (Is.  ix.). 

2d.  His  Birth  and  His  Youth. — Kings  from  the  East 
will  adore  Him  and  offer  Him  frankincense  and  gold  (Ps. 
Ixxi.,  Is.  Ix.);  Rachel  (whose  tomb  is  near  Jerusalem)  shall 
weep  in  vain  for  her  children  (Jer.  xxxi.) ;  the  Saviour  will 
dwell  in  Egypt  (Os.  xi.),  and  in  Nazareth  of  Galilee  (Is.  ix.); 
He  will  converse  with  the  inhabitants  of  Sion  (Is.  xii.,  etc.), 
and  He  will  honor  the  Temple  wdth  His  presence  (Agg.  ii., 
Mai.  iii.). 

He  will  be  poor  and  in  labors  from  His  youth  (Ps.  ixxxvii.), 
and  yet  He  will  be  king  and  eternal  possessor  of  a  kingdom 
which  will  extend  to  the  utmost  parts  of  the  earth  (Ps.  ii.) ;  He 
will  be  obedient  (Ps.  xxxix.),  gentle  and  peaceful  (Ps.  cxix.). 

3d.  His  Apostolic  Career. — He  will  not  cry  nor  have 
respect  to  persons;  He  will  not  break  the  bruised  reed  nor 
extinguish  the  smoking  flax  (Is.  xlii.);  He  will  seek  that 
which  was  lost,  the  sheep  which  were  lost;  and  that  which 
was  driven  away  He  will  bring  again;  He  will  bind  up  that 
which  was  broken,  and  that  which  was  weak  He  will 
strengthen,  and  that  which  was  strong  He  will  preserve,  and 
He  will  lead  them  in  the  way  of  justice  (Ezech.  xxxiv.) ;  He 
will  comfort  all  that  mourn  (Is.  Ixi.),  and  by  His  miracles  He 
will  open  the  eyes  of  the  blind,  unstop  the  ears  of  the  deaf, 
and  loosen  the  tongue  of  the  dumb  (Is.  xxxv.,  xlii.).     Yet 


202  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

notwithstanding  the  intrinsic  efficacy  of  His  divine  word 
(Is.  xi.,  xUx.),  notwithstanding  the  splendor  of  this  heavenly 
light  (Is.  ix.,  xlii.,  Ix.),  the  Messias  will  be  a  stone  of 
stumbling,  a  rock  of  offence,  a  snare  and  a  ruin  to  many  of 
Israel  (Is.  i.,  vi.,  viii.,  xlii.). 

4th.  His  Passion  and  His  Death. — Surely  He  hath  borne 
our  iniquities  and  carried  our  sorrows,  and  we  have  thought 
Him  as  it  were  a  leper,  and  as  one  struck  by  God  and  af- 
fficted.  But  He  was  wounded  for  our  iniquities,  He  was 
bruised  for  our  sins:  the  chastisement  of  our  peace  was  upon 
Him,  and  by  His  bruises  we  are  healed.  All  we  hke  sheep 
have  gone  astray,  every  one  hath  turned  aside  into  his  own 
way :  and  the  Lord  hath  laid  on  Him  the  iniquity  of  us  all. 
There  is  no  beauty  in  Him  nor  comeliness:  we  have  seen 
Him,  and  there  was  no  sighthness,  that  we  should  be  desirous 
of  Him:  despised  and  the  most  abject  of  men,  a  man  of  sor- 
rows and  acquainted  with  infirmity.  His  look  was  as  it  were 
hidden  and  despised,  whereupon  we  esteemed  Him  not  (Is. 
liii.);  a  worm  and  no  man:  the  reproach  of  men,  and  the 
outcast  of  the  people  (Ps.  xxi.).  What  are  these  wounds  in 
the  midst  of  Thy  hands?  With  these  I  was  wounded  in  the 
house  of  them  that  loved  Me  (Zach.  xiii.).  They  have  dug 
My  hands  and  feet,  they  have  numbered  all  My  bones.  And 
they  have  looked  and  stared  upon  Me;  they  parted  My 
garments  among  them,  and  upon  My  vesture  they  cast  lots 
(Ps.  xxi.).  All  they  that  saw  Me  have  laughed  Me  to  scorn; 
they  have  spoken  with  the  Hps  and  wagged  with  the  head: 
He  hoped  in  the  Lord,  let  Him  deliver  Him;  if  He  be  the  true 
Son  of  God,  He  will  defend  Him  and  dehver  Him  out  of  the 
hands  of  His  enemies  (Ps.  xxi.,  Wis.  ii.).  Many  calves  have 
surrounded  Me,  fat  bulls  have  besieged  Me.  They  have 
opened  their  mouths  against  Me  as  a  Hon  ravening  and 
roaring  (Ps.  xxi.).  They  gave  Me  gall  for  My  food,  and  in  My 
thirst  they  gave  Me  vinegar  to  drink  (Ps.  lx\dii.).  I  am 
made  a  derision  to  all  My  people,  their  song  all  the  day 
long  (Lam.  iii.). 


DIVINITY   OF  THE   CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  203 

5th.  The  Establishment  of  His  Church. — God  will  pom- 
out  His  spirit  upon  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem ;  He  will  give 
them  a  new  heart,  and  put  a  new  spirit  into  them  (Is.  xlvi., 
Ezech.  xxxvi.,  Joel  ii.).  The  word  of  God  preached  first 
in  Sion  (Is.  ii.)  will  be  brought  by  faithful  witnesses  (Is. 
xliii.,  xliv.)  to  Lydia,  Africa,  Italy,  Greece,  to  distant 
islands,  to  people  plunged  in  darkness  who  will  be  won  to  the 
truth  (Is.  Ix.,  lii.).  They  will  be  brought  through  fire,  they 
will  be  tried  as  gold  is  tried  (Zach.  xiii.).  A  new  covenant 
will  bring  together  all  the  peoples  (Is.  xlix.,  Jer.  xxxi., 
Os.  ii.,  etc.) :  the  wolf  shall  dwell  with  the  lamb,  the  leopard 
shall  he  down  with  the  kid,  the  calf  and  the  hon  and  the 
sheep  shall  abide  together  (Is.  xi..  Soph,  iii.,  Jer.  xxxii.). 

6th.  The  Sacrifice  of  the  New  Law. — Malachias  termi- 
nates the  series  of  prophets.  He  crowns  the  magnificent  chain 
of  revelations  concerning  the  Messias  with  the  announcement 
that  the  sacrifices  of  the  Old  Law,  hitherto  offered  only  in  the 
Temple  of  Jerusalem,  will  be  replaced  by  a  pure  oblation 
which  will  be  offered  in  all  places  and  among  all  nations  (Mai. 
i.,  X.,  xi.).  Isaias  and  David  add  tliat  the  ministers  of  this 
sacrifice  of  the  New  Covenant  will  be  priests  chosen  from 
among  all  nations  (Is.  Ixvi.),  under  a  supreme  pontiff  ac- 
cording to  the  order  of  Melchisedech  (Ps.  cix.). 

7th.  Prophetic  Figures  of  the  Messias. — God  wished 
that  the  future  Redeemer  should  be  continually  kept  before 
the  mind  and  the  imagination  of  His  people.  Thus  He  was 
not  content  to  announce  Him  by  the  ministry  of  His  prophets, 
but,  in  conformity  with  the  genius  of  the  Jewish  people  and 
of  Eastern  nations  in  general.  He  prefigured  the  Messias  by 
Hving  types  and  symboHc  events.  Let  us  cite  among  the 
first  Isaac,  Joseph,  Moses,  David,  Jonas;  among  the  second 
the  paschal  lamb,  the  manna,  the  brazen  serpent.  In  fact 
the  entire  worship  and  all  the  institutions  of  the  Jews  may 
be  said  to  have  been  typical.  *'AU  the  administration  of 
this  people,"  says  St.  Augustine,  ''was  only  a  continual 
prophecy  of  the  king  they  expected. "    We  must  mention 


204  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

this  kind  of  prophecy;  though  it  does  not  serve  as  the  basis 
of  our  present  proof,  it  will  complete  the  demonstration  we 
shall  derive  later  from  prophecy  properly  so  called. 

Five  hundred  years  elapsed  between  the  end  of  the  Mes- 
sianic prophecies  and  the  beginning  of  their  fulfilment.  We 
know,  moreover,  that  to  render  any  doubt  of  the  anteriority 
of  the  prophecies  impossible,  Providence  had  caused  the  Old 
Testament  to  be  translated  into  Greek  three  hundred  years 
before  Christ,  and  that  this  translation,  called  the  Septuagint, 
was  spread  throughout  the  entire  world  long  before  the 
coming  of  the  promised  Messias.  But  were  they  reahzed,  these 
numerous  prophecies  uttered  by  a  serie^.  of  men  during  four 
thousand  years,  and  predicting  with  more  and  more  detail 
the  same  marvellous,  extraordinary  event  which  could  not 
possibly  be  foreseen?  This  is  the  question  which  it  is  par- 
ticularly important  for  us  to  examine. 

2.  Fulfilment  of  the  Messianic  Prophecies.  —  We 
have  only  to  read  the  Gospel  to  be  fully  convinced  that  these 
prophecies  were  realized  perfectly  in  Jesus  Christ  and  only  in 
Jesus  Christ.  The  agreement  of  the  Old  and  the  New  Testa- 
ment is  so  striking  that  if  we  had  not  incontestable  pioof 
that  the  prophetic  books  existed  centuries  before  Christ,  we 
should  be  tempted  to  beheve  that  these  numerous  and  very 
precise  details  were  written  after  the  events,  not  by  prophets, 
but  by  historians. 

1st.  The  period  of  the  coming  of  the  Messias  was  so  clearly 
determined  and  so  well  known  throughout  the  world  that,  as 
soon  as  the  Roman  Empire  and  a  general  peace  were  pro- 
claimed, not  only  the  Jews  but  all  nations  looked  for  the  great 
event.  The  event  itself  was  predicted,  as  we  have  seen,  and 
attested  by  all  contemporary  historians.  ''The  people," 
says  Tacitus,  ''relying  on  the  ancient  prophecies,  were  gener- 
ally persuaded  that  the  East  would  prevail  and  that  from 
Judea  would  come  the  masters  of  the  world."  Suetonius 
and  Josephus  express  themselves  in  almost  the  same  terms. 
This  hope  of  the  promised  Liberator  was  so  general  and  so 


DIVINITY   OF   THE   CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  205 

strong  among  the  Jews  that  they  were  ready  to  follow  blindly 
any  insurgent  who  proclaimed  himself  the  Messias  or  His 
precursor.  Hence  the  numerous  revolts  which  preceded  the 
ruin  of  Jerusalem. 

It  was  very  remarkable  that  while  Europe  expected  a 
Saviour  from  the  East,  the  people  of  India  and  China  ex- 
pected him  from  the  West.  Voltaire  attests  this  in  his 
additions  to  general  history.  From  all  parts  the  attention 
of  mankind  was  centred  upon  a  small  point  of  the  globe 
which  Boulanger,  another  sceptic,  calls  ''the  polar  star  of  the 
hope  of  all  nations.'' 

2d.  The  other  prophecies  are  no  less  fully  realized.  We  may 
say  that  the  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament  are  a  portrayal 
of  the  life  and  the  death  of  Jesus  Christ,  an  abridged  history 
of  His  works  and  of  the  marvellous  establishment  of  His 
Church.  The  relation  is  evident  and  the  application  is  not 
only  easy,  but  it  follows  of  itself.  The  prophets  are  the 
witnesses  who  unanimously  testify  in  favor  of  Jesus,  says 
St.  Peter  to  the  Jews  (Acts  x.).  All  their  predictions,  all  the 
prophetic  types,  all  the  figurative  institutions  of  the  Old  Law 
relate  to  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  and  prove  that  He  is  the  true 
Messias  designated  by  divine  inspiration,  the  Saviour  of  the 
human  race. 

3d.  Need  we  be  astonished,  then,  to  find  the  apostles,  in 
order  to  convince  the  Jews  of  the  divine  mission  of  Christ,  con- 
stantly appealing  to  the  testimony  of  the  prophets?  To  other 
auditors  they  presented  arguments  of  another  kind,  but  to 
their  compatriots  they  could  offer  no  more  convincing  testi- 
mony. Thus  St.  Peter  made  it  the  basis  of  the  exhortations 
which  converted  thousands.  And  after  testifying  himself 
to  the  voice  heard  on  Thabor  he  quotes  the  prophecies  as 
still  more  incontestable  proof  (2  Pet.  i.  19).  And  St.  Paul, 
on  his  part,  devoted  entire  days,  from  morning  till  evening, 
to  convincing  them  that  Jesus  was  prefigured  in  the  law 
of  Moses  and  the  prophets  (Acts  xxviii.  23). 

4th.  Our  Saviour  Himself  revived  the  courage  of  the  disci- 


206  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

pies  by  showing  them  that  the  things  about  which  they  were 
troubled  were  only  the  fulfilment  of  the  Scriptures  (Luke 
xxiv.).  Thus  He  said  to  the  Jews:  ''Search  the  Scriptures, 
for  you  think  in  them  to  have  life  everlasting,  and  the  same 
are  they  that  give  testimony  of  Me  "  (John  v.  39). 

Conclusion. — ^The  fulfilment  of  so  many  prophecies, 
uttered  so  many  centuries  before  the  events  foretold — events 
which  could  not  possibly  be  conjectured,  proves  incontestably 
that  Jesus  is  truly  the  Messias,  the  Saviour  sent  by  God, 
announced  and  expected  during  four  thousand  years;  that, 
consequently,  the  religion  founded  by  Him  and  predicted  for  so 
many  years  is  truly  divine.  In  fact  only  He  to  whom  all 
ages  are  as  the  present  moment,  only  He  whose  wisdom 
and  almighty  power  can  prepare  and  direct  events,  could 
make  such  revelations.  ''The  fulfilment  of  all  the  prophe- 
cies," Pascal  truly  observes,  "is  a  perpetual  miracle,  and  we 
need  no  other  proof  to  recognize  the  divinity  of  the  Christian 
religion." 

We  cannot  resist  citing  here  a  magnificent  page  from 
Lacordaire  on  the  subject  of  the  Messianic  prophecies  (5th 
conf.  on  Jesus  Christ): 

"And  now,  gentlemen,  what  think  you  of  this?  Here  are 
two  parallel  and  corresponding  facts,  both  certain,  both  of 
colossal  proportion,  one  which  lasted  two  thousand  years 
before  Christ,  the  other  which  lasted  eighteen  hundred  years 
since  Jesus  Christ;  one  which  announces  a  great  revolution, 
a  revolution  impossible  to  foresee,  the  other  which  is  its 
accomplishment,  both  having  Jesus  Christ  for  principle,  for 
end,  and  for  bond  of  union.  Yet  once  more  what  think  you 
of  it?  Are  you  bold  enough  to  deny  it?  But  what  will  you 
deny?  The  existence  of  the  Messianic  idea?  But  it  is  in  the 
Jewish  people  who  still  live,  in  all  the  continuous  monuments 
of  their  history,  in  the  universal  traditions  of  the  human 
race,  in  the  most  positive  avowals  of  the  most  profound 
unbelief.  Would  you  deny  the  anteriority  of  the  prophetic 
details?     The  Jews,   who  crucified  Jesus  Christ  and  who 


DIVINITY   OF   THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  207 

have  a  national  and  political  interest  in  depriving  Him  of  the 
proofs  of  His  divinity,  declare  to  you  that  their  Scriptures 
were  formerly  what  they  are  now;  and  for  additional  cer- 
tainty, two  himdred  and  fifty  years  before  Jesus  Christ, 
under  Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  king  of  Egypt,  all  the  Old 
Testament,  by  order  of  this  monarch,  was  translated  into 
Greek  and  fell  into  the  possession  of  the  Greek,  the  Roman, 
the  whole  civilized  world.  Would  you  turn  to  the  other  pole 
of  the  question,  and  deny  the  accompUshment  of  the  Messianic 
idea?  The  Catholic  Church,  the  offspring  of  that  idea,  is 
before  your  eyes — she  has  baptized  you.  Would  you  stand 
upon  the  point  of  junction  of  those  two  formidable  events? 
Would  you  deny  that  Jesus  Christ  has  verified  the  Messianic 
idea  in  His  person,  that  He  was  a  Jew  of  the  tribe  of  Juda, 
of  the  house  of  David,  and  the  Founder  of  the  Catholic  Church 
upon  the  double  ruin  of  the  synagogue  and  idolatry?  But 
the  two  interested  parties — and  they  are  irreconcilable 
enemies — confess  all  this.  The  Jew  affirms  it  and  the 
Christian  affirms  it.  Would  you  say  that  this  juncture  of 
colossal  events  at  the  precise  point  of  Jesus  Christ  is  the 
result  of  chance?  Were  it  even  so,  chance  is  but  a  brief  and 
fortuitous  accident,  its  definition  excludes  the  idea  of  con- 
tinuity; there  is  no  chance  of  two  thousand  years'  duration 
and  of  eighteen  centuries  added  thereto. 

'^Gentlemen,  when  God  works  there  is  nothing  to  be  done 
against  Him.  Jesus  Christ  appears  before  us  as  the  moving 
principle  of  the  past  as  well  as  of  the  future,  the  soul  of  the 
times  which  precede  Him  as  well  as  of  the  t'mes  which  follow 
Him.  He  appears  before  us  in  H  s  ancestry,  upheld  by  the 
Jewish  people,  the  most  important  social  and  religious  monu- 
ment of  ancient  times;  and  in  His  posterity,  upheld  by  the 
Catholic  Church,  the  greatest  social  and  religious  work  of 
modern  times.  He  appears  before  us  holding  in  His  left 
hand  the  Old  Testament,  the  greatest  book  of  the  times 
which  precede  Him,  and  in  His  right  hand  the  Gospel,  the 
greatest  book  of  the  times  which  come  after  Him.     And  yet, 


208  CHRISTIAN    APOLOGETICS. 

SO  preceded  and  so  followed,  He  is  still  greater  in  Himself 
than  His  ancestors  and  His  posterity,  than  the  patriarchs  and 
the  prophets,  than  the  apostles  and  the  martyrs.  Supported 
by  all  that  is  most  illustrious  before  and  after  Him,  His  per- 
sonal physiognomy  still  stands  out  from  this  subhme  scene, 
and,  by  outshining  that  which  seemed  above  all  reveals  to 
us  the  God  who  has  neither  model  nor  equal.'' 


IV.  Fourth  Proof. 

THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  APOSTLES  AND  OF  THE  DISCIPLES  OF 

JESUS. 

1.  The  Prediction  of  these  Miracles. — The  religion  which 
the  disciples  of  Jesus  were  to  estabhsh  was  to  encounter  innu- 
merable obstacles.  Providence  must  needs  lend  the  assist- 
ance of  miracles  to  those  charged  with  this  ministry.  Jesus, 
who  desired  that  the  divine  power  should  shine  forth  in  human 
weakness,  guaranteed  in  advance  this  salutary  assistance: 
^'Amen,  amen,  I  say  to  you,  he  that  believeth  in  Me,  the 
works  that  I  do,  he  also  shall  do,  and  greater  than  these  shall 
he  do  "  (John  xiv.  12.     See  also  Mark  xvi.  17,  18). 

The  disciples  published  this  solemn  promise  of  the  Master 
in  the  Gospel,  and  thus  in  a  manner  pledged  themselves  to 
work  miracles.  It  was  a  sort  of  challenge  to  the  Jews  and 
pagans  to  disprove  the  divine  teaching:  if  they  had  not 
given  striking  proof  of  their  miraculous  power,  the  propaga- 
tion of  the  Gospel  would  have  been  arrested  at  the  very  outset. 

2.  The  Fulfilment  of  this  Prediction. — To  be  convinced 
that  the  divine  oracle  was  Hterally  fulfilled  we  have  only  to 
look  through  the  Gospels  (Mark  xvi.  20),  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  and  ecclesiastical  history.  We  find  from  these 
writings  that  nothing  was  more  frequent  than  miracles  at 
the  beginning  of  the  Church.  Nor  is  this  astonishing,  for 
St.  Paul  tells  us  that  miracles  "are  for  a  sign,  not  to  be- 
lievers, but  to  unbelievers."    According  to  St.  Gregory  the 


DIVINITY   OF   THE    CHRISTIAN    RELIGION.  209 

budding  tree  of  the  Christian  rehgion  needed,  in  order  to 
grow  and  thrive,  the  divine  dew  of  grace. 

1st.  Among  the  numerous  miracles  of  St.  Peter  related  in  the 
Acts  let  us  mention  particularly  the  cure  of  the  lame  man  at 
the  gate  of  the  Temple  (ch.  iii.),  that  of  the  man  ill  of  palsy 
(ch.  ix.),  and  other  cures  effected  simply  by  his  shadow  (ch. 
v.);  the  resurrection  of  Tabitha  (ch.  ix.);  the  miraculous 
deliverance  of  several  of  the  apostles  from  prison  (ch.  vi.) ; 
that  of  Peter  himself  (ch.  xii.).  We  find  also  numerous 
miracles  performed  by  St.  Paul  at  Ephesus  and  elsewhere 
by  the  mere  touch  of  his  garments  (ch.  xix.) ;  the  resurrec- 
tion of  a  young  man  at  Troas  (ch.  xx.),  etc. 

Two  other  miracles  accomplished  in  connection  with  the 
apostles  merit  special  attention:  we  wish  to  speak  of  the 
descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  of  the  conversion  of  St.  Paul. 

2d.  The  miracle  of  Pentecost  was  both  physical  and  moral : 
physical,  in  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost  under  the  form  of 
tongues  of  fire,  and  in  the  gift  of  tongues  granted  to  the 
apostles;  moral,  in  the  complete  transformation  of  the 
apostles  (Acts  ii.).  One  hundred  persons  were  present  in 
the  cenacle  when  this  great  event  took  place,  which  was 
immediately  carried  through  the  world  by  the  vast  con- 
course of  strangers  who  were  then  at  Jerusalem.  If  the 
miracle  had  not  been  real  and  incontestable,  the  mere  denial 
of  these  strangers,  on  their  return  to  their  various  countries, 
would  have  sufficed  to  prevent  the  propagation  of  the  Gospel. 

3d.  The  miracle  of  St.  Paul's  conversion  is  sufficient  of 
itself  to  convert  a  man  of  good  faith.  ^ 

Here,  in  a  few  words,  is  the  history  of  this  marvellous  event. 
Saul,  a  zealous  persecutor  of  the  Christians,  was  on  his  way 
to  Damascus  to  arrest  the  disciples  of  Christ  and  bring  them 
bound  to  Jerusalem;  but  at  midday,  as  he  nears  Damascus, 
he  is  suddenly  blinded  by  a  great  light  and  falls  to  the  ground. 

*  Picard,  pt.  ii.,  ch.  4.  Also  the  old  but  interesting  pamphlet  by 
Lord  Lyttleton,  "  The  Christian  Religion  demonstrated  by  the  Con- 
YQFsion  a,nd  the  Apostleship  of  St.  Paul." 


210  CHRISTIAN    APOLOGETICS. 

He  hears  the  voice  of  Jesus  and  immediately  a  complete 
moral  transformation  takes  place  in  him.  At  the  same  mo- 
ment Our  Lord  appears  to  Ananias  and  instructs  him  con- 
cerning the  new  convert.  Saul  is  cured  of  his  bhndness  by- 
Ananias  and  receives  baptism.  After  he  has  become  Paul 
he  is  distinguished  by  his  great  love  for  Jesus  and  by  his  gen- 
erous, persevering  zeal  for  the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles.^ 

There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  as  to  the  reality  of  the 
facts;  they  are  related  three  times  in  the  Acts:  in  ch.  ix.  by 
St.  Luke;  in  chs.  xxii.  and  xxvi.  by  St.  Paul,  who  speaks  of 
them  again  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  ch.  i.  15.  When 
a  man  of  the  character  of  St.  Paul  relates  a  fact  of  this  kind 
with  the  most  minute  details,  and  when  we  have  also  as 
guarantee  his  extraordinary  conversion  and  the  marvels 
which  followed  it,  we  cannot  believe  that  he  was  the  victim 
of  an  hallucination. 

It  is  no  less  evident  that  such  facts  cannot  be  explained  by 
natural  causes.  Renan,  who  declares  all  miracle  impossible, 
must  endeavor  to  find  a  natural  explanation,  but  what  an 
explanation  it  is!  St.  Paul  was  in  a  state  of  great  excite- 
ment: he  had  a  malignant  fever  and  an  inflammation  of  the 
eyes;  then  a  storm  broke  out,  during  which  he  imagined  he 
heard  Our  Saviour's  voice;  after  the  storm  he  had  a  sun- 
stroke which  made  him  blind!  .  .  .  Where  are  the  proofs  of 
all  this?  He  takes  good  care  not  to  give  them.  And  yet  this 
same  Renan  presumes  to  say,  ''It  belongs  to  the  rationalistic 
school  to  explain  the  events  of  history  by  adequate  causes!" 

4th.  The  gift  of  miracles,  which  marked  the  beginning  of 
the  Church,  continued,  for  the  same  reasons,  in  a  very  special 
manner  during  the  first  ages.  The  Fathers  of  this  period 
speak  very  positively  of  the  wonders  which  were  performed 
publicly  and  frequently  before  their  eyes;  they  invite  the 
pagans  to  witness  them;  they  defy  them,  for  example,  to 
cite  a  demoniac  who  has  not  been  delivered.  The  miracles, 
moreover,  were  so  patent  that  the  enemies  of  Christianity 

»  "  St.  Peter  and  the  First  Years  of  Christianity,"  by  P  Abb^  Fouard. 


DIVINITY   OF   THE    CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  211 

never  dreamed  of  contesting  them;  hence  the  holy  Fathers 
made  no  effort  to  prove  the  reahty  of  them;  all  that  they 
endeavored  to  prove  to  the  pagans  was  that  these  super- 
natural works  were  wrought  by  the  intervention  of  God,  and 
not  by  that  of  evil  spirits  or  magic. 

5th.  Ecclesiastical  history  records  so  many  incontestable 
miracles  of  each  of  the  centuries  which  followed,  that  the 
''Acts  of  the  Saints"  may  be  said  to  be  a  worthy  continuation 
of  the  ''Acts  of  the  Apostles."  To  be  convinced  of  this  we 
have  only  to  read  the  Bollandists'  Acta  Sanctorum.  Read, 
for  example,  what  Sulpicius-Severus,  the  biographer  and 
companion  of  St.  Martin  of  Tours,  relates  of  the  miracles 
which  he  witnessed  and  which  won  for  the  holy  bishop  the 
surname  of  Thaumaturgus.  No  less  astonishing  and  authentic 
are  the  wonderful  works  of  St.  Simeon  Stylites,  related  by 
Theodoret,  who  witnessed  them  and  wrote  an  account  of 
them  for  the  people  who  daily  flocked  to  the  column  of  the 
holy  anchorite.  We  also  find  in  St.  Augustine's  admirable 
treatise,  "The.  City  of  God,"  a  series  of  striking  miracles, 
performed  in  his  day  and  sometimes  before  his  eyes,  par- 
ticularly by  the  recently  discovered  relics  of  St.  Stephen, 
the  first  martyr.  There  is  no  doubt  that  these  three  historians 
are  absolutely  unimpeachable.^ 

6th.  AVho  can  in  good  faith  deny  that,  even  in  our  own  day, 
God  still  renders  to  the  divinity  of  His  Son  and  of  the  Church, 
which  is  His  work,  the  solemn  and  incontrovertible  testi- 
mony of  miracles? 

Read,  for  example,  in  the  fifth  volume  of  the  learned 
Abbe  Moigno's  Splendeurs  de  la  Foi,  the  chapter  entitled  Le 
miracle  au  tribunal  de  la  science,  where,  as  he  justly  says,  he 
"demonstrates  completely  by  means  of  the  most  advanced 
science  that  five  miracles  performed  in  our  day  in  the  full 
light  of  the  eighteenth  and  nineteenth  centuries,  and  similar 
in  every  respect  to  those  of  the  Gospel,  have  been  brilliantly 

^  An  account  of  these  facts  is  found  in  Butler's  "  Lives  of  the 
Saints,"  Jan.  5,  Aug.  3,  and  Nov.  11. 


212  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

attested  by  the  most  august  and  enlightened  tribunal  of  the 
universe.'^  ^ 

Remark. — It  is  well  to  observe  that  one  true  miracle  is 
sufficient  to  prove  the  divinity  of  a  religion  in  favor  of  which 
it  is  manifested.  Now,  as  miracles  in  favor  of  the  religion  of 
Christ  have  been  produced  in  every  century,  in  order  to 
destroy  this  present  proof  we  should  have  to  reject  all  the 
testimony  of  history,  that  is,  the  history  of  all  past  ages. 

V.  Fifth  Proof. 

FULFILMENT  OF  THE   PROPHECIES  MADE  BY  JESUS 
HIMSELF. 

We  have  seen  that  Jesus  faithfully  fulfilled  in  His  person 
the  Messianic  prophecies,  thus  showing  that  He  is  truly  the 
Messias  foretold  by  the  prophets.  Now  we  shall  find  still 
further  proof  of  His  divine  mission  in  the  prophecies  which 
He  Himself  uttered.  If  prophecy  is  as  great  a  proof  as 
miracle  of  the  divinity  of  a  mission  and  of  a  doctrine,  what 
is  it  when  the  event  foretold  is  miraculous?  If  to  prophesy 
is  to  perform  a  miracle,  what  is  it  to  prophesy  miracles? 
Now  the  prophecies  of  Jesus  usually  foretold  miraculous 
events. 

1.  The  Passion,  the  Death,  the  Resurrection  of 
Jesus. — ^We  shall  not  dwell  upon  Jesus'  prophecies  concerning 
His  Passion,  His  death,  and  His  Resurrection.  For  example, 
when  He  said  to  His  disciples:  "  Behold  we  go  up  to  Jerusalem, 
and  the  Son  of  man  shall  be  betrayed  to  the  chief  priests,  and 
to  the  scribes  and  ancients,  and  they  shall  condemn  Him  to 
death,  and  deliver  Him  to  the  Gentiles :  and  they  shall  mock 
Him,  and  spit  on  Him,  and  scourge  Him,  and  kill  Him:  and 
the  third  day  He  shall  rise  again"  (Mark  x.;  Matt.  xvii.). 
It  is  unnecessary  to  say  how  accurately,  even  in  the  smallest 

»  See  Newman;  Hay;  A.  C.  Q.  i.  337;  D.  R.  New  Ser.  xxvi.  1,  lU.  Ser. 
iv.  386,  C.  W.  xxxii.  433.     See  also  references,  P.  II.,  ch.  2,  art.  2,  ii. 


DIVINITY   OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  213 

details,  all  these  things  were  fulfilled.  Jesus  also  foretold 
the  treason  of  Judas,  the  flight  of  His  disciples  at  the  time 
of  His  apprehension,  the  triple  denial  of  Peter,  the  descent 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  etc. 

We  have  just  seen  that  He  also  predicted  the  miracles  per- 
formed by  His  disciples  and  apostles.  Let  us  insist  a  little 
upon  the  miracles  which  were  to  be  realized  at  a  later  period, 
or  even  to  embrace,  so  to  speak,  all  centuries. 

2.  The  Destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  the  Disper- 
sion OF  the  Jewish  People. — A.  Jesus  declared,  at  differ- 
ent times  and  in  the  most  explicit  manner,  the  misfortunes 
with  which  Jerusalem  was  threatened  in  the  near  future,  the 
siege  of  the  city,  the  entire  destruction  of  the  Temple.  Speak- 
ing of  the  Temple  to  the  disciples  He  said  ''there  shall  not  be 
left  here  a  stone  upon  a  stone."  They  asked  Him  when  this 
destruction  would  take  place.  ''Amen,"  He  said  to  them, 
^'this  generation  shall  not  pass  until  all  these  things  be  done. 
.  .  .  But  before  all  these  things  they  will  lay  their  hands  on 
you,  and  persecute  you,  delivering  you  up  to  the  synagogues, 
and  into  prisons,  dragging  you  before  kings  and  governors 
for  My  name's  sake.  .  .  .  When  you  shall  see  Jerusalem  com- 
passed about  with  an  army,  then  know  that  the  desolation 
thereof  is  at  hand. "  And  again  as  He  approached  the 
unhappy  city  He  exclaimed:  "The  days  shall  come  upon 
thee,  and  thy  enemies  shall  cast  a  trench  about  thee,  and 
compass  thee  round,  and  straiten  thee  on  every  side,  and 
beat  thee  flat  to  the  ground,  and  thy  children  who  are  in 
thee ;  and  they  shall  not  leave  in  thee  a  stone  upon  a  stone, 
because  thou  hast  not  known  the  time  of  thy  visitation.  .  .  . 
Thy  children  shall  fall  by  the  edge  of  the  sword,  and  shall  be 
led  away  captives  into  all  nations;  and  Jerusalem  shall  be 
trodden  down  by  the  Gentiles,  till  the  times  of  the  nations 
shall  be  fulfilled.  .  .  .  Amen  I  say  to  you,  this  generation  shall 
not  pass  away  till  all  things  be  fulfilled."  (Matth.  xxiv.; 
Mark  xiii. ;  Luke  xix. ;  xxi.) 

Josephus,  the  contemporary  Jewish  historian,  has  trans- 


214  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

mitted  to  us  terrible  details  of  the  destruction  of  this  city. 
If  his  accounts  are  to  be  received  with  entire  faith,  about  a 
milHon  men  perished  by  fire,  or  by  the  sword,  or  by  famine. 
He  declares  that  no  city  since  the  beginning  of  the  world  ever 
suffered  as  did  Jerusalem.  We  know  that,  after  the  taking 
of  the  city,  the  last  combatants  defended  themselves  in  the 
Temple  with  unheard-of  fierceness,  and  that  Titus  prohibited 
its  destruction  imder  the  severest  penalties,  but  in  vain:  a 
soldier,  moved,  Josephus  says,  by  a  divine  inspiration,  threw 
a  flaming  torch  into  one  of  the  buildings,  and  tKe  fire  spread 
so  rapidly  that  in  a  brief  period  the  whole  edifice  was  reduced 
to  ashes.  The  catastrophe  was  so  unforeseen  and  so  com- 
plete that  the  conqueror  could  not  but  recognize  and  pro- 
claim the  divine  intervention  of  which  he  was  only  the 
instrument. 

When  the  Jews  remaining  in  Judea  made  an  attempt  to 
rise  under  Adrian,  he  quelled  the  revolt  by  slajdng  six  hundred 
thousand  and  dispersing  the  rest.  They  were  afterwards 
forbidden  under  pain  of  death  to  enter  Jerusalem,  which 
was  thenceforth  called  iEHa  CapitoHna. 

In  addition  to  this,  Our  Saviour's  words  concerning  this 
event  were  still  more  solemnly  confirmed.  Julian  the 
Apostate,  in  order  to  falsify  the  divine  oracle,  left  nothing 
undone  to  rebuild  the  Temple.  But  the  most  extraordinary 
phenomena  prevented  the  execution  of  his  impious  design. 
This  is  attested  by  the  historian  Socrates,  by  St.  Ambrose, 
St.  John  Chrysostom,  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  and  even  by  the 
rationalist  Gibbon,  who  acknowledges  it  with  reluctance, 
and  by  the  irrefutable  testimony  of  the  pagan  historian 
Ammianus  Marcellinus,  friend  of  the  emperor  and  officer 
of  the  royal  army.  ''When  Alypius,  assisted  by  the  gov- 
ernor of  the  province,  strenuously  urged  on  the  work,  there 
issued,"  says  Ammianus,  ''great  balls  of  fire  from  the  earth 
near  the  foundations,  scorching  and  blasting  the  laborers  and 
rendering  the  ground  at  times  inaccessible;  finally,  the  ^dc- 
torious  element  continuing  to  break  forth  upon  the  work- 


DIVINITY   OF  THE   CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  215 

men,  as  if  obstinately  and  resolutely  bent  upon  driving  them 
away,  Alypius  was  obliged  to  give  over  the  enterprise.'^  The 
result  of  this  attempt  was  that  in  digging  for  the  foundation 
of  the  new  Temple  that  of  the  old  was  completely  destroyed, 
thus  fulfilling  to  the  letter. the  words  of  the  prophecy  an- 
nouncing that  not  a  stone  would  be  left  upon  a  stone.* 

B.  We  know  how  the  prediction  in  regard  to  the  dispersion 
of  the  Jews  was  verified.  When  a  people  is  scattered  among 
other  nations,  usually  in  a  short  time  there  is  a  complete 
fusion  of  the  two  races.  Contrary  to  this  law  of  history,  the 
people  of  Israel,  though  dispersed  throughout  the  world,  con- 
tinue to  form  a  race  apart,  thus  remaining,  despite  them- 
selves, a  perpetual  witness  of  the  fulfilment  of  the  proph- 
ecies and  of  the  curse  which  was  laid  upon  this  deicide  people. 
''God,"  says  Bossuet,  ''by  a  means  of  which  there  is  but 
this  one  instance,  has  preserved  the  Jews,  though  out  of  their 
country  and  in  a  state  of  ruin,  longer  than  the  very  nations 
who  conquered  them.  We  no  longer  find  any  trace  of  the 
ancient  Medes,  Persians,  Greeks,  nor  even  of  the  Romans. 
They  are  lost  and  swallowed  up  in  other  races.  The  Jews, 
though  the  prey  of  these  ancient  nations  so  celebrated  in 
history,  have  survived  them,  and  God,  in  preserving  them, 
holds  us  in  expectation  of  what  He  will  still  do  for  the  rem- 
nant of  this  unhappy  people  formerly  so  favored.  Yet  their 
obduracy  serves  as  a  means  of  salvation  to  the  Gentiles,  and 
gives  them  the  advantage  of  finding  where  least  expected, 
in  the  hands  of  the  Jews,  the  Scriptures  which  have  foretold 
Jesus  Christ  and  His  mysteries.''  (Disc,  on  Univ.  Hist.  P.  II., 
ch.  XX.) 

3.  Persecutions. — "You  shall  be  witnesses  unto  Me  in 
Jerusalem  and  in  all  Judea  and  Samaria,  and  even  to  the 
uttermost  parts  of  the  earth"  (Acts  i.  8).  When  Jesus  fore- 
told to  the  disciples  their  success  in  the  apostleship  He  an- 
nounced to  them  at  the  same  time  that  they  would  be  hated 
and  persecuted  because  of  His  name.    "  If  the  world  hate  you, 

*  Card.  Moran,  Occasional  Papers,  p.  38;  Parsons,  Studies,  L 


216  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

know  ye  that  it  hath  hated  Me  before  you;  if  they  have 
persecuted  Me,  they  will  also  persecute  you"  (John  xv.  18, 
20).  '^Behold,  I  send  you  as  sheep  in  the  midst  of  wolves; 
.  .  .  men  will  deliver  you  up  in  councils,  and  they  will 
scourge  you  in  their  synagogues.  .  .  .  You  shall  be  hated  by 
all  men  for  My  name's  sake."  (Matth.  x.)  ''Blessed  shall 
you  be  when  men  shall  hate  you,  and  when  they  shall  separate 
you,  and  shall  reproach  you  and  cast  out  your  name  as  evil 
for  the  Son  of  man's  sake.  Be  glad  in  that  day  and  rejoice; 
for  behold,  your  reward  is  great  in  heaven."  (Luke  vi.) 
"  The  hour  cometh,  that  whosoever  killeth  you,  will  think 
that  he  doth  a  service  to  God  "  (John  xvi.). 

Such  was  the  oracle.  The  simple  reading  of  the  Acts  shows 
how  perfectly  it  was  fulfilled.  We  find  the  apostles  reviled, 
dragged  before  tribunals,  cast  into  prison,  scourged,  yet  re- 
joicing in  this  ignominious  and  cruel  treatment,  ''because 
they  were  counted  worthy  to  suffer  reproach  for  the  name 
of  Jesus."  The  persecution  of  the  just  is  reahzed  even  in 
our  own  day. 

4.  Charity  among  Christians. — "By  this  shall  all  men 
know  that  you  are  My  disciples,  if  you  have  love  one  for 
another.  .  .  .  That  they  all  may  be  one,  as  Thou,  Father,  in 
Me  and  I  in  Thee :  that  they  may  also  be  one  in  us :  that  the 
world  may  beheve  that  Thou  hast  sent  Me."  (John  xiii.  35; 
xvii.  21,  23.) 

Jesus  predicted  that  His  Church  would  be  distinguished 
by  a  boundless  charity,  by  an  admirable  union  of  hearts  and 
souls.  Now  what  does  history  tell  us?  In  the  very  begin- 
ning of  the  new  religion  the  distinguishing  mark  of  Christians 
was  a  love  which  made  them  one  heart  and  one  soul.  Later 
centuries  furnished  innumerable  heroes  of  Christian  charity, 
who  practised  all  the  spiritual  and  corporal  works  of  mercy, 
devoting  themselves  to  reheving  the  miseries  and  comforting 
the  sorrows  of  poor  humanity.  We  shall  demonstrate  this 
more  fully  in  another  part  of  our  work  (P.  IL,  ch.  5). 

5.  This  might  be  the  place  to  mention  the  prophecies  re- 


DIVINITY   OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  217 

lating  to  the  establishment  of  the  Church  and  its  perpetual 
duration;  but  we  shall  have  to  speak  of  them  in  the  exposi- 
tion of  our  sixth  proof  .^ 

Conclusion. — The  fulfilment  of  these  various  prophecies 
authorize  us  to  conclude  that  the  divinity  of  Jesus  and  of  His 
supreme  work,  the  Church,  is  incontestable.  This  conclusion 
is  the  more  firmly  impressed  upon  us  that  several  of  these 
prophecies  were  made  in  direct  confirmation  of  Our  Saviour's 
mission;  as,  for  example,  that  announcing  the  Resurrection. 
''An  evil  and  adulterous  nation,"  says  Jesus,  speaking  of  the 
Pharisees  and  the  unbeHeving  Jews  who  sought  to  ensnare 
Him  in  His  speech,  '^seeketh  a  sign,  and  a  sign  shall  not  be 
given  it,  but  the  sign  of  Jonas  the  prophet.  For  as  Jonas 
was  in  the  whale's  belly  three  days  and  three  nights,  so  shall 
the  Son  of  man  be  in  the  heart  of  the  earth  three  days  and 
three  nights."  Also  the  prophecies  relating  to  the  treason 
of  Judas  and  the  persecution  the  Church  was  to  endure.  ''I 
tell  you  before  it  come  to  pass,"  says  Our  Saviour,  ''that 
when  it  shall  come  to  pass  you  may  believe  that  I  am  He'' 
(John  xiii.  19). 

VI.  Sixth  Proof. 

THE  MIRACULOUS  ESTABLISHMENT  OF  THE  RELIGION  OF  JESUS, 
AND  ITS  PERPETUAL  DURATION  THROUGH  ALL  AGES. 

This  also  is  a  miracle,  but  of  the  moral  order.  Let  us  ex- 
plain the  meaning  of  these  words:  a  miracle  of  the  moral 
order. 

The  moral  world  is  governed  by  laws  even  as  the  physical. 
For  example,  it  is  a  law  of  the  moral  world  that  a  vast 
multitude  of  men  will  not  change  their  convictions,  habits,  and 
customs  in  a  short  time,  particularly  when  their  passions, 
interests,  and  inclinations  unite  in  opposing  such  a  change.^ 

^  A.  C.  Q.  xvii.  225. 

'  The  laws  of  the  moral  order,  taken  as  a  whole,  constitute  what  is 
frequently  called  the  law  of  history.    This  law  enables  us  to  determine 


218  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

God  intervenes  in  the  moral  order  as  well  as  in  the  physical 
in  two  ways:  one  is  ordinary  and  simply  providential,  the 
other  extraordinary  and  truly  miraculous.  To  constitute, 
strictly  speaking,  a  miracle  of  the  moral  order  there  must  be  a 
real  derogation  of  a  certain  law  of  the  moral  order;  a  simply 
providential  ordering  of  events  is  not  sufficient,  even  though 
it  may  be  more  or  less  marvellous. 

A  miracle  of  the  moral  order  may  be  defined  as  an  effect 
produced  by  human  liberty,  and  derogating  a  law  of  man's 
nature  to  a  degree  that  requires  the  immediate  and  extraor- 
dinary intervention  of  God. 

It  goes  without  saying  that  a  miracle  of  the  moral  order 
is  usually  much  more  difficult  to  discern  than  one  of  the 
physical  order.  Hence,  treating  with  an  adversary  of  bad 
faith,  we  should  dwell  most  on  miracles  of  the  physical  order. 
It  is  no  less  true,  however,  that,  to  an  unbiassed  mind,  the 
establishment  and  propagation  of  Christianity,  as  well  as  its 
preservation  to  the  present  day,  are  very  real  and  striking 
miracles. 

1.  The  Establishment  and  Propagation  of  Chris- 
tianity.^— A.  We  must  first  establish  the  fact  itself  of  this 
rapid  propagation.  But  it  is  so  incontestable,  supported  as  it 
is  by  so  many  ancient  monuments,  profane  as  well  as  sacred, 
that  unbelievers  themselves  do  not  attempt  to  deny  it;  they 
try  only  to  weaken  the  effect  of  it  by  endeavoring  to  explain  it 

in  advance,  usually  with  great  probability,  sometimes  with  certainty, 
what,  in  given  circumstances,  will  be  the  conduct  of  individuals  or 
nations  left  to  themselves.  It  is  clear  that  this  idea  must  not  be 
confounded  with  that  of  the  moral  law,  properly  so  called,  which 
establishes  an  obligation  of  conscience :  it  is  a  moral  law,  for  example, 
that  we  shall  not  do  to  another  what,  if  done  to  ourselves,  we  should 
consider  an  injustice. 

^  See  works  on  Church  History;  Allies  (Formation,  etc.);  Manahan, 
B.  II.;  Hope;  Th^baud,  S.J.,  Church  and  Gentile  World,  I.,  ch.  3,  4; 
II.,  ch.  9;  Broeckart,  The  Fact  Divine;  DoUinger,  First  Age  of  Chris- 
tianity and  the  Church;  Parsons,  Studies,  I.,  ch.  4;  Spalding,  J.  M., 
MiscelL,  vol.  i.,p.  I.;  A.  C.  Q.  xix.  57. 


DIVINITY  OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  219 

by  natural  causes.     Let  us  quote,  however,  a  few  historical 
texts. 

The  apostles  had  not  completed  their  career  before  St.  Paul 
could  write  to  the  Romans:  ''Your  faith  is  spoken  of  in 
the  whole  world  ;"  and  to  the  Colossians:  ''  The  Gospel  which 
is  come  unto  you,  as  also  it  is  in  the  whole  world,  bringeth 
forth  fruit  and  groweth,  even  as  it  doth  in  you."  St.  Justin, 
a  hundred  years  after  Christ,  counted  several  savage  nations 
among  the  faithful.  ''We  are  but  of  yesterday,"  said  Ter- 
tullian,  in  his  turn,  in  his  Apology  to  the  magistrates  of  the 
empire,  "and  we  fill  your  cities,  your  islands,  your  camps, 
the  palace,  the  senate,  the  forum:  we  have  left  you  only  your 
temples.  If  we  were  to  withdraw  from  you,  the  empire 
would  be  a  desert.  .  .  .  Among  the  Parthians,  the  Medes,  the 
Elamites,  among  the  inhabitants  of  Mesopotamia,  of  Armenia, 
of  Phrygia,  of  Cappadocia,  of  Pontus,  of  Asia  Minor,  of 
Egypt,  of  Cyrenaica,  among  the  various  races  of  the  Gsetuli, 
of  the  Moors,  of  the  populations  of  Spain,  of  Gaul,  of  Brittany, 
of  Germany,  everywhere  we  find  the  faithful."  In  the  year 
112,  Pliny  the  Younger,  alarmed  at  the  immense  number  of 
Christians  in  his  province,  wrote  the  Emperor  Trajan,  who 
had  appointed  him  governor  of  Bithynia:  "The  contagion 
of  Christian  superstition  is  not  confined  to  the  cities,  it  has 
invaded  the  villages  and  the  country  and  has  taken  possession 
of  persons  of  every  age,  rank,  and  sex.  Our  temples  are 
almost  entirely  abandoned  and  the  religious  ceremonies  neg- 
lected." "This  race  of  Christians  is  everywhere,"  Seneca 
wrote.  Renan  himself  says,  speaking  of  the  rapid  spread 
of  Christianity:  "In  one  hundred  and  fifty  years  the 
prophecy  of  Jesus  was  accomplished.  The  grain  of  mus- 
tard-seed which  had  become  a  tree  began  to  cover  the 
world." ' 

B.  A  propagation  so  rapid,  so  universal  throughout  the 
known  world  in  the  space  of  three  centuries  could  not  be 

»  D.  R.,  Oct.  1880  (Truth  and  Falsehood  of  Kenan's  Lectures;) 
Broeckart,  1.  c. 


220  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

a  natural  event.  We  shall  be  convinced  of  this  if  we  con- 
sider the  circumstances  which  accompanied  it.  Considered 
from  a  human  point  of  view,  the  new  religion  en- 
countered little  more  than  insurmountable  obstacles.  It 
had  against  it: 

1st.  The  Very  Men  who  Preached  it. — ^They  were  not 
orators  or  philosophers,  or  men  familiar  with  the  secrets  of 
science  and  diplomacy,  but  Jews,  despised  by  other  nations; 
Galileans,  despised  by  other  Jews;  with  the  exception  of  St. 
Paul  they  were  men  from  the  humblest  walks  in  life,  poor, 
uneducated,  with  nothing  to  credit  them  in  the  eyes  of  the 
world,  wholly  without  natural  advantages  fitted  to  impress 
the  minds  of  their  hearers.  In  a  word,  they  had  nothing 
which  could  accredit  their  mission  to  the  people,  to  the 
priests,  to  philosophers,  to  magistrates,  to  emperors;  on  the 
contrary,  everything  connected  with  them  was  of  a  character 
to  discredit  their  doctrine  and  to  prejudice  the  success  of 
their  enterprise.^* 

2d.  The  Doctrine  it  Taught. — If  this  doctrine  had  but 
favored  the  passions,  its  propagation  would  be  more  com- 
prehensible; but  it  was  no  less  opposed  to  the  depraved 
inclinations  of  the  heart  than  to  the  prejudices  of  the 
mind.  Its  mysteries  offended  man's  intellectual  pride,  and 
its  severe  and  inflexible  morality  boldly  warred  against  his 
corrupt  inclinations.  What  a  contrast  between  the  life 
which  the  pagans  led  without  remorse  and  that  which  the 
new  doctrine  imposed  upon  them!  Their  modesty  must  be 
carried  to  humility,  their  meekness  and  charity  to  loving  their 
enemies  as  themselves,  to  forgiving  the  greatest  injuries, 
their  patience  to  bearing  insults  without  murmur,  their 
detachment  from  earthly  things  even  to  choosing  poverty 
rather  than  injustice,  their  chastity  to  repelling  the  very 
thought  of  evil,  their  fidehty  to  the  faith  even  to  martyrdom. 
Here  is  what  was  asked  of  men  who  in  paganism  could 
satisfy  their  passions  and  give  themselves  up  to  the  most 

» Thebaud,  Church  and  G.  W.,  I.,  ch.  3. 


DIVINITY   OF   THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  221 

shameful  disorders,  after  the  example  and  under  the  pat- 
ronage of  their  gods. 

3d.  The  End  it  Claimed  to  Attain. — This  was  nothing 
less  than  to  replace  the  ancient  and  venerated  law  of  Moses 
by  a  new  law  promulgated  by  a  man  whom  the  synagogue 
had  just  condemned  to  an  ignominious  death;  to  destroy 
throughout  the  world  an  idolatry  which  had  reigned  for  so 
many  ages,  an  idolatry  which  had  a  national  character, 
which  was  considered  as  an  indispensable  social  necessity, 
as  forming  an  essential  part  of  the  laws;  an  idolatry  which 
was  connected  with  every  act  of  public  and  of  private  life; 
an  idolatry,  finally,  which  was  supported  by  all  human 
powers,  by  the  strongest  and  most  absolute  power  which  ever 
existed.  And  all  this  was  to  be  replaced  by  a  detested  wor- 
ship, which  the  grave  Tacitus  accused  of  hating  mankind,  a 
worship  which  carried  its  extravagance  so  far  as  to  require 
its  followers  to  adore  not  only  an  invisible  God,  but  a  Jew 
condemned,  at  the  demand  of  the  priests  and  magistrates  of 
His  own  nation,  to  an  ignominious  death.* 

4th.  The  Time  When  it  Appeared. — It  was  the  age  of 
Augustus  and  of  Tiberius,  that  is,  one  of  the  most  polished 
and  enlightened,  but  at  the  same  time  the  proudest  and 
most  corrupt;  an  age  when  the  Roman  empire  was  filled 
with  philosophers,  orators,  poets,  and  historians;  when 
Rome  had  become  the  mistress  of  nations,  and  ruled  the 
world  by  laws  and  customs  all  based  upon  pagan  ideas. 
The  ignorance  of  the  apostles,  therefore,  had  to  contend  with 
the  learning  of  the  greatest  geniuses  inflated  with  the  pride 
of  their  attainments. 

5th.  The  Violent  Persecutions  to  which  it  was  Sub- 
jected FROM  ITS  Birth. — Far  from  receiving  any  support 
from  public  authority,  the  new  religion  was  the  object  of  the 
hatred  of  the  synagogue,  of  the  tyranny  of  emperors  and  of 
kings,  of  the  cruelty  of  governors  and  of  magistrates,  of  the 

*  See  in  Lacordaire's  Conferences  on  the  Church  the  reasons  why 
statesmen  and  scholars  were  opposed  to  the  young  Christianity. 


222  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

rage  of  the  priests,  the  philosophers  and  the  people.  From  the 
year  64,  when  the  persecution  of  Nero  broke  out,  to  the  edict 
of  Constantine  in  313,  that  is,  for  two  centuries  and  a  half, 
there  were  ten  general  persecutions  ordered  by  emperors, 
and  a  large  number  of  local  persecutions  which  took  place 
either  in  consequence  of  the  edicts  remaining  unrevoked, 
or  which  were  excited  by  the  hatred  of  the  governors,  the 
magistrates,  and  the  priests  of  the  idols.  And  let  us  not 
forget  that  among  the  crowned  persecutors  were  vaunted 
philosophers,  such  as  Adrian,  Trajan,  Marcus  Aurelius;  and 
there  were  some  who,  like  Decius  and  Diocletian,  were  so 
prodigal  of  human  blood  that  they  beheved  they  had  exter- 
minated the  very  name  of  Christian. 

Conclusion. — The  argument  we  have  just  presented  is  as 
simple  as  it  is  conclusive;  it  rests  upon  a  striking,  unde- 
niable historical  truth,  which  does  not  need  to  be  proved. 
It  is  a  well-known  fact  that  before  the  fifteenth  year  of  the 
reign  of  Tiberius  the  name  of  Christian  was  unknown;  pa- 
ganism reigned  as  master  in  a  society  corrupt  in  the  ex- 
treme; the  cross,  an  instrument  of  punishment  reserved  for 
slaves,  was  a  sign  of  extreme  infamy.  And  yet  from  the 
time  of  Constantine,  despite  a  formidable  opposition,  despite 
long  and  cruel  persecutions,  the  Christianity  announced  by 
Jews,  obscure  disciples  of  a  crucified  criminal,  triumphed 
even  in  Athens  and  Rome;  the  cross,  transformed  into  an 
object  of  adoration  and  love,  adorned  the  diadems  of  mon- 
archs,  and  became  the  emblem  of  honor  and  o'  glory  among 
regenerated  nations.  The  miracle  is  palpable,  and  we  can 
say  with  fullest  confidence,  the  finger  of  God  is  here.  ''He," 
says  Chateaubriand, ''  who  could  cause  a  cross  to  be  adored,  he, 
we  swear  it,  can  be  no  other  than  a  God."  We  are  famihar 
with  the  celebrated  dilemma  of  St.  Augustine:  either  the 
rehgion  of  Jesus  Christ  triumphed  over  all  obstacles  by  force 
of  miracles,  in  which  case  we  must  acknowledge  that  it  is 
divine;  or  it  was  estabhshed  without  miracles,  in  which  case 
this  conversion  of  the  world  is  the  greatest  of  all  miracles. 


DIVINITY   OF   THE    CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  223 

Our  conclusion  is  further  justified  by  the  fact  that  here 
again  we  find  in  the  miracle  of  this  rapid  propagation 
the  fulfilment  of  a  miracle  of  prophecy.^  In  fact  Jesus  had 
clearly  announced  the  rapid  estabhshment  of  His  rehgion. 
''All  power,"  He  said  to  His  disciples,  ''is  given  to  Me  in 
heaven  and  on  earth;  going  therefore,  teach  ye  all  nations: 
baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost :  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things 
whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you:  and  behold  I  am  with 
you  all  days,  even  to  the  consummation  of  the  world.  This 
gospel  of  the  kingdom  shall  be  preached  in  the  whole  world, 
for  a  testimony  to  all  nations."  (Matth.  xxviii.  18,  19,  20; 
xxiv.  14.)  "If  I  be  Hfted  up  from  the  earth  (that  is,  after 
My  death  on  the  cross),  I  will  draw  all  things  to  Myself" 
(Johnxii.  32).  "You  shall  receive  the  power  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  coining  upon  you,  and  you  shall  be  witnesses  unto 
Me  in  Jerusalem  and  in  all  Judea  and  Samaria,  and  even  to 
the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth  "  (Acts  i.  8). 

Objections. — Great  have  been  the  efforts  of  obstinate 
imbehef  to  weaken  the  result  of  this  irrefutable  fact. 

1st.  According  to  Gibbon  and  those  who  have  followed 
him,  the  spread  of  the  Gospel  is  naturally  explained  by  the 
unity  of  the  Roman  empire,  the  universal  peace,  the  building 
of  the  mihtary  roads,  the  enthusiasm  of  the  masses  for  the 
novel  and  the  marvellous,  the  need  that  was  felt  of  a  purer 
morahty,  the  charity  of  the  first  Christians,  the  very  perse- 
cutions which  served  to  spread  rather  than  to  stifle  the 
Christian  doctrine. 

Answer. — We  do  not  think  it  our  duty  to  refute  one  by 
one  these  perhaps  specious  but  really  inconclusive  arguments. 
Let  us  only  remark  generally  that  there  is  no  explanation 
imagined  by  unbelief  which  is  not  in  manifest  contradiction 
with  history,  or  which  does  not  contradict  itself,  or  take  the 
effect  for  the  cause,  attributing  the  propagation  of  the  Gospel 

*  On  the  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament  concerning  the  univer- 
sality of  the  Church  see  Thebaud,  i.,  ch.  2. 


224  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

to  results  which  its  doctrine  had  already  produced,  or  at 
least  which  are  not  radically  insufficient  to  explain  the 
effect  produced. 

We  are  far  from  claiming  that  everything  in  the  path  of 
Christianity  was  an  absolute  obstacle.  We  acknowledge 
that  divine  Providence,  ''which  reacheth  from  end  to  end 
mightily  and  ordereth  all  things  sweetly,"  made  the  Roman 
people  the  unconscious  precursor  destined  to  prepare  the 
way  for  the  new  religion.  The  unity  and  peace  of  the  Roman 
empire  may  have  contributed  to  the  diffusion  of  the  faith. 
But  this  same  unity,  this  peace,  and  this  facility  of  communi- 
cation were  incomparably  more  advantageous  to  the  crowned 
persecutors  than  to  their  defenceless  victims.  It  is  evident, 
moreover,  that  these  things,  while  they  smoothed  the  path 
of  the  Gospel,  could  not  be  considered  the  efficacious  cause  of 
its  success.  As  to  the  alleged  attraction,  not  of  a  few  choice 
souls,  but  of  multitudes  in  every  part  of  the  globe,  who  can 
seriously  admit  it,  particularly  when  there  is  question  of  a 
rehgious  doctrine  preached  under  the  conditions  stated 
above,  and  imposing  upon  proud  minds,  upon  men  given  up 
to  their  passions,  incomprehensible  dogmas  and  the  most 
rigid  morality?  Were  the  masses  at  that  time  so  powerfully 
attracted  by  the  loss  of  worldly  goods,  of  Hberty,  of  life  itself? 
If  minds,  as  it  is  falsely  claimed,  were  predisposed  in  favor 
of  Christianity,  how  was  it  that  the  pagans  for  nearly  three 
centuries  pursued  and  persecuted  Christians  with  inhuman 
barbarity? 

In  brief,  if  there  were  circumstances  which  may  have 
favored  the  propagation  of  the  Gospel,  it  is  very  evident  that 
the  result  obtained  bears  no  proportion  to  the  human  means 
employed.  For  we  must  not  forget  that,  according  to  the 
hypothesis  of  naturalism,  Jesus  was  only  an  ordinary  man, 
a  poor  unlettered  artisan,  wholly  without  human  resources; 
that  the  disciples  whom  He  gathered  about  Him  were  also 
poor,  despised,  ignorant  men,  having  no  divine  mission  or 
supernatural  power.    Such  were  the  envoys  whom  this  Jew 


DIVINITY   OF   THE   CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  225 

of  Galilee  sent  throughout  the  world  to  substitute  for  the 
revered  law  of  Moses  a  powerful  idolatry,  a  doctrine  of  his 
own  invention,  a  doctrine  contradicting  every  incUnation  of 
the  human  heart  and  opposed  to  every  received  social 
tradition.  Imagine  such  an  enterprise  imdertaken  in  our 
own  day,  when  the  means  of  communication  are  so  numerous 
and  so  easy;  even  granting  the  new  apostles  all  the  advan- 
tages of  eloquence,  riches,  power — who  would  venture  to 
predict  any  success,  any  lasting  success  for  their  mission? 
Admitting  that  their  doctrine,  wholly  human  and  curbing 
the  passions,  excited  by  its  novelty  the  enthusiasm  of 
one  or  several  nations,  how  long  would  this  enthusiasm 
last?  The  study  of  the  human  heart  and  of  history  proves 
that  such  reformations  are  very  short-Hved;  they  last  as 
long  as  passions  and  interests  can  profit  by  the  doctrinal 
novelty.^ 

2d.  Islamism  and  Protestantism  were  also  very  rapidly 
propagated. 

Answer. — No  comparison  is  possible  here.  Every  one 
knows  that  Islamism,  a  sensual  religion  authorizing  the 
gratification  of  the  most  brutal  passions,  was  propagated  by 
the  sword,  while  Christianity,  proscribing  all  vices,  and  par- 
doning nothing  to  human  weakness,  was  propagated  despite 
the  violence  and  persecution  to  which  it  was  subjected. 
Hence  Pascal  says:  ''If  Mahomet  adopted  a  human  means 
of  success,  that  adopted  by  Jesus  was  a  human  means  of 
perishing;  and  instead  of  concluding  that,  since  Mahomet 
succeeded,  Jesus  could  succeed,  we  must  recognize,  on  the 
contrary,  that  if  Mahomet  succeeded,  Christianity  could  not 
but  fail  unless  sustained  by  divine  aid."^ 

'  Thebaud,  Ch.  and  Moral  W.,  ch.  4;  D.  R.,  Oct.  1880,  Kenan's 
lectures. 

^  On  Islamism  see  Newman,  Hist.  Sketches,  I.;  Schanz,  II.,  ch.  6; 
Parsons,  Studies,  I.,  ch.  37;  Alzog,  Ch.  Hist.,  II.;  Allies,  Peter's  Rock 
in  Mohammed's  Flood,  ch.  6;  Lilly,  Ancient  Religion,  ch.  3;  The 
Qaims  of  Christianity,  ch.  3;  D.  R.  Old  Ser.  vii.  78,  April  78,  Oct. 
'93.    On  Buddhism  see  below,  p.  276. 


226  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

As  to  Protestantism,  we  have  only  to  consult  history  to 
find :  1st.  That  it  was  not  a  new  religion,  but,  under  pretext  of 
reform,  an  open  revolt  against  Catholicism,  which  had  existed 
for  fifteen  centuries;  further,  that  it  was  as  much  a  political 
as  a  religious  movement;  2d.  That  its  votaries  were  attracted 
by  riches,  and  by  the  laxity  it  introduced  in  morals  and 
discipline;  3d.  That  many  human  elements  favored  its  de- 
velopment ;  4th.  That  to  retain  what  it  had  acquired  it  was 
obliged  to  have  recourse  to  the  most  odious  and  implacable 
measures  of  proscription  against  the  Catholic  Church.^  Read 
in  connection  with  this  subject  what  we  say  in  the  second 
part  of  this  work  in  the  chapters  relating  to  Protestantism 
and  intolerance.^ 

2.  The  Miracle  of  the  Continual  Preservation  of 
Christianity. — The  religion  founded  by  Jesus  Christ  and 
preached  by  the  apostles  under  the  most  unfavorable  cir- 
cumstances, not  only  could  not  be  implanted  in  the  world 
without  the  assistance  of  God,  but  it  could  not  be  preserved 
to  us  without  a  manifestly  divine  intervention. 

History  in  hand,  we  have  frequently  traced  the  various 
causes  of  decadence  and  ruin  which  would  have  completely 
effaced  Christianity  had  it  been  other  than  a  divine  work. 
We  cannot  do  more  than  briefly  enumerate  here  the  un- 
ceasing and  terrible  combats  recorded  in  the  annals  of  the 
world. 

The  Church  of  Jesus  Christ,  as  P.  Ollivier  says  in  his  beautiful 
conference  on  the  establishment  of  Christianity,  had  hardly 
risen,  before  paganism  unsheathed  its  sword  against  her — a 
double-edged  sword  which  it  wielded  for  three  centuries; 
only  at  the  end  of  the  third  century  did  it  fall  dulled  and 
powerless.  Persecution  was  followed  by  the  still  more 
formidable  trial  of  heresies  and  schisms,  further  complicated 

^Spalding,  J.  L.,  lect.  11,  12;  Lilly,  Qaims,  etc.,  ch.  6;  Parsons, 
Studies,  III.,  p.  326  ff.;  Alzog,  Ch.  Hist.,  III.,  §334;  Spalding,  Prot. 
Reform.,  I.,  p.  II..  ch.  4;  Balmes,  ch.  10;  Br.  W.  x. 

'  Lacordaire,  conf .  4  on  Jesus  Christ. 


DIVINITY   OF   THE    CHRISTIAN    RELIGION.  227 

by  the  dismemberment  of  the  empire  under  the  assaults  of 
barbarians,  and  by  the  struggle  with  barbarism  for  Uberty 
and  civihzation.  Then  rose  Mahometism,  which,  encirchng 
Europe  with  an  iron  girdle,  sought  to  crush  her  in  its  powerful 
grasp.  Peace  itself  did  not  free  the  Church  from  trials: 
the  rulers  of  the  age,  abusing  the  influence  which  the  pro- 
tection of  the  Church  accorded  them,  created  in  her  bosom 
simony  and  corruption;  they  went  so  far  as  to  subjugate  the 
Papacy,  forcing  it  to  transfer  its  see  from  Rome  to  Avignon. 
There  came  finally  the  last  trial,  the  most  formidable  of  all 
and  which  has  lasted  to  the  present  day:  the  insurrection 
and  apostasy  of  Christian  nations.  Long  prepared  by  the 
Cathari,  the  Waldenses,  and  the  Albigenses,  resisted  by  a 
crusade  and  by  the  efforts  of  the  sons  of  St.  Francis  and 
St.  Dominic,  the  insurrection  gathered  new  strength  from 
the  rash  ambition  of  Philip  le  Bel,  from  the  great  schism 
of  the  East,  and  the  attempts  of  Wickliff  and  Huss.  Later, 
under  the  powerful  impetus  of  Luther,  it  broke  like  a  tempest 
over  the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ.  To  accomplish  its  work,  it 
assumes,  at  need,  all  forms,  it  takes  all  names,  it  exhausts  all 
means.  As  Protestantism  it  combats  with  pen  and  sword; 
as  the  Revolution  it  organizes  noyades  and  erects  scaffolds; 
as  Philosophy  it  is  lavish  of  sarcasm  and  calumny;  as  an 
armed  and  brutal  power  it  invades  the  pontifical  domains  and 
lays  its  sacrilegious  hands  on  the  Vicar  of  Jesus  Christ. 
''The  dream  of  Philosophy,"  wrote  a  modern  pubUcist,  ''was 
to  overthrow  the  Papacy,  for  it  appreciated  that  there  was 
the  head,  there  was  the  heart  of  Catholicism.  If  it  could  die, 
this  head,  this  heart  must  be  the  point  of  attack.  The 
Papacy  destroyed,  Philosophy  gained  its  cause.  The  Revo- 
lution came ;  it  knew  the  word  of  command ;  it  aimed  at  the 
heart;  it  dragged  the  Pope  into  exile;  he  died  there!''  These 
are  the  facts  as  history  presents  them.  Yet  what  happened! 
While  schools  of  philosophy,  religious  sects,  kingdoms,  em- 
pires, in  a  word,  all  human  institutions  have  successively  fallen 
and  disappeared,   even  when  everything   seemed  to  favor 


228  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

them,  the  Church  has  stood  steadfast  in  the  midst  of  the 
ruins  accumulated  about  her;  she  has  even  come  forth 
purer  and  stronger  from  the  trials  which  Providence  per- 
mitted her  to  meet  in  her  passage  through  the  centuries. 
Thus  the  words  of  St.  Augustine  are  truly  verified:  "The 
Church  may  suffer,  but  it  is  not  given  any  himaan  power 
to  prevail  against  her:  impugnari  potest,  expugnari  non 
potest  J' 

Remarks. — ^To  these  facts,  so  conclusive  of  themselves, 
let  us  add  two  remarks  which  will  make  their  value  more 
appreciated. 

1st.  Not  only  has  the  Catholic  Church  existed  for  nineteen 
centuries,  but  it  has  always  remained  the  same:  it  has  pre- 
served the  same  doctrine,  the  same  constitution,  the  same 
form  of  government,  the  same  discipline,  the  same  worship. 
This  is  a  unique  and  incomparable  fact.  It  is  the  more 
marvellous  that  if  governments,  even  those  which  seem  most 
stable,  succeed  in  preserving  an  existence  of  a  few  centuries, 
it  is  only  by  means  of  concessions  and  compromises,  only  by 
making  the  constitutions  and  the  laws  yield  to  the  demands 
of  the  times.  It  is  quite  otherwise  with  the  Church:  she 
has  always  been  inflexible  and  has  remained  immutable  in 
all  that  is  essential  to  her. 

This  perpetuity  of  the  work  of  Christ  was  predicted  several 
times  in  the  most  formal  manner.  "Behold  I  am  with  you 
all  days,  even  to  the  consummation  of  the  world,"  said 
Jesus  to  His  disciples  when  He  sent  them  to  preach  the 
Gospel.  And  what  was  to  be  the  result  of  this  assistance? 
"Thou  art  Peter,"  He  said  to  him  whom  He  made  the  chief 
of  His  apostles,  "and  upon  tliis  rock  I  will  build  My  Church, 
and  the  gates  of  hell,"  that  is,  the  powers  of  darkness, 
persecution,  snares, "  shall  not  prevail  against  it "  (Matth.  xvi. 
18).  "In  the  world  you  shall  have  distress,"  He  tells  all 
His  apostles;  "but  have  confidence,  I  have  overcome  the 
world  "  (John  xvi.  33).  Here  again  we  meet  a  double  miracle, 
that  of  prophecy  and  that  of  its  fulfilment. 


DIVINITY   OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  229 

Conclusion. — From  all  that  we  have  stated  in  this  para- 
graph flows  an  evident  conclusion.  If  the  Church  had  been 
a  human  work,  it  would  long  since  have  ceased  to  exist 
except  in  the  minds  of  men.  Time  alone  would  have  de- 
stroyed it;  for  time,  a  celebrated  diplomat  has  said,  is  the 
great  enemy.  Since  the  Catholic  Church  (we  shall  prove  in 
the  second  part  of  our  work  that  the  rehgion  of  Jesus  is 
identical  with  her)  has  vanquished  time,  which  destroys  all 
things,  if  she  still  stands,  ever  deriving  new  vigor  from 
combat  itself,  it  is  the  arm  of  God  which  has  sustained  her 
through  all  ages.  To  draw  this  consequence  we  have  only 
to  place  side  by  side  the  two  palpable,  incontestable  facts 
mentioned:  on  the  one  hand,  the  fact  of  the  rapid  propaga- 
tion of  Christianity  and  of  its  preservation  to  the  present 
day ;  on  the  other,  that  of  the  absolute  impotence  of  the  human 
means  at  the  disposition  of  the  new  religion  in  its  struggle 
with  such  powerful  and  numerous  enemies.  Nothing  more 
than  common  sense  is  required  in  order  to  recognize  that 
such  effects  are  not  the  result  of  the  wisdom  or  power  of 
man,  but  require  the  all-powerful  intervention  of  God. 

VII.  Seventh  Proof. 

THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE   MARTYRS.* 

To  appreciate  the  force  of  the  argument  in  favor  of  the 
divinity  of  our  faith  afforded  by  the  testimony  of  the  martyrs 
it  is  important  to  consider: 

1.  The  Very  Large  Number  of  these  Martyrs. — From 
Nero  to  Constantine,  that  is,  during  two  and  a  half  centuries, 
Christianity  was  the  object  of  the  most  terrible  persecutions. 

*  On  the  early  persecutions  of  the  Church  read  Church  History; 
also  Acts  of  the  Early  Martyrs,  byFastre,  S.J.;  Gleason,  I.;  Manahan; 
Allies  (Formation,  II.);  Sweeney;  Marcy;  Craig;  Parsons,  Studies,  I., 
ch.  3;  Burnet  (Why,  etc.,  ch.  13);  D.  R.  New  Ser.  x.  362,  xvi.  85; 
C.  W.  xxii.  104;  A.  C.  Q.  v.  468.  On  modern  persecutions  see 
references  below,  P.  II.,  ch.  4,  art.  1. 


230  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

A  very  large  number  of  men  courageously  shed  their  blood 
either  during  the  ten  general  persecutions  or  during  the 
unceasing  local  persecutions.  The  Emperor  Diocletian, 
following  in  the  footsteps  of  his  predecessor,  employed  such 
severe  measures  against  the  Christians  that  he  flattered  him- 
self that  he  had  exterminated  them;  witness  the  inscription 
on  the  medal  which  he  had  struck:  Nomine  Christianorum 
deleto  (the  Christian  name  has  vanished). 

2.  The  Diversity  in  their  Condition. — Masters  and 
servants,  rich  and  poor,  men  and  women,  children  and  old 
men,  soldiers,  nobles,  philosophers,  all  vied  with  one  another 
in  their  generous  ardor  to  confess  the  faith  of  Jesus  Christ. 

3.  The  Barbarity  of  their  Torments. — They  were  so 
numerous  that  entire  works  have  been  written  upon  the 
various  kinds,  and  the  simple  enumeration  of  the  tortures 
inflicted  upon  the  Christians  fills  us  with  horror;  they  caused 
the  most  exquisite  pains,  says  Tacitus.  •  Seneca,  after 
enumerating  some  of  the  terrible  tortures,  adds  that  the 
martyrs  endured  all  that  human  barbarity  could  invent. 

4.  The  Manner  in  which  they  Bore  these  Torments. 
— They  were  gentle  and  calm  in  the  midst  of  the  most  ex- 
cruciating suffering.  Nothing  in  their  bearing  suggested 
fanaticism  or  frenzy  or  a  spirit  of  vengeance;  on  the  very 
scaffold  and  at  the  stake  they  prayed  for  their  execu- 
tioners. 

5.  The  Striking  Miracles  which  took  place  at  the 
execution  of  these  men  who  were  put  to  death  out  of  hatred 
of  Jesus  Christ,  whose  divinity  they  proclaimed. 

6.  The  Happy  Fruits  of  the  Martyrdom  of  the 
Christians. — The  number  of  conversions  wrought  by  these 
triumphant  deaths  must  have  been  very  numerous  to  enable 
TertulHan  to  write:  ''The  more  they  slay  us  the  more 
we  multiply:  the  blood  of  the  martyrs  is  the  seed  of  new 
Christians. ' '  The  unalterable  peace  and  joyful  serenity  which 
shone  on  the  brow  of  the  martyr  in  the  midst  of  the  most 
appalHng    tortures  frequently  caused  the  executioners  and 


DIVINITY   OF   THE    CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  231 

the  tyrants  themselves  to  embrace  the  faith  of  their  victims. 
Upon  all  these  facts  we  shall  consult  with  profit  a  general 
history  of  the  Church. 

Conclusion. — It  follows  from  this  testimony  of  the  mar- 
tyrs that  the  reHgion  for  which  they  laid  down  their  lives 
is  truly  divine.     In  fact, 

1st.  So  many  martyrs  of  all  ages,  sexes,  and  classes  of  soci- 
ety, in  every  part  of  the  world  and  all  at  the  same  period, 
could  not  have  endured  with  heroic  patience,  not  a  speedy 
and  comparatively  painless  death,  but  the  most  prolonged  and 
refined  tortures,  if  God  had  not  manifestly  sustained  them, 
and  consequently  if  their  faith  had  not  been  divine.  Moral 
strength  of  this  kind  does  not  belong  to  human  nature. 
Let  us  not  forget  that  their  sufferings  were  purely  voluntary; 
to  escape  them  they  had  only  to  apostatize. 

2d.  Before  every  tribunal  in  the  world,  when  there  is 
question  of  facts,  proof  by  testimony  is  admitted,  for  facts 
can  be  proved  only  by  testimony.  Now  the  martyrs  died, 
not  to  defend  speculative  opinions,  but  to  attest  the  fact  of 
Christian  revelation,  that  is,  of  the  divine  mission  of  Jesus 
Christ,  supported  by  the  Messianic  prophecies,  by  the  miracles 
He  wrought,  by  His  life,  His  superhuman  death,  His  Resurrec- 
tion, His  Ascension,  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  mir- 
acles of  the  apostles,  etc. :  all  this  forms  an  essential  part  of 
our  religion.  Men  have  been  known  to  die  for  false  opinions, 
believing  them  true,  but  never  for  tenets  which  they  doubted 
or  which  they  knew  to  be  false.  Therefore  the  Christian  mar- 
tyrs must  have  had  very  strong  proof  of  the  divinity  of  their 
religion;  they  must  have  been  profoundly  convinced  of  the 
facts  upon  which  it  is  based,  since  they  sacrificed  everything, 
even  life  itself,  to  obtain  the  blessings  which  this  religion 
promised  them.  When  we  find  the  apostles  laying  down  their 
lives  to  attest  the  facts  of  which  they  had  been  ocular  wit- 
nesses; when  we  find  innumerable  Christians  of  the  first  cen- 
tury shedding  their  blood  for  the  faith  which  they  had  freely 
embraced,  we  have  reason  to  say  with  Pascal,  "I  can  readily 


^32  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

believe  the  histories,  that  is,  the  historical  facts  which  wit- 
nesses attested  with  their  lives." 

Objections. — In  order  to  weaken  the  force  of  the  argument 
derived  from  the  testimony  of  the  martyrs,  it  has  been  said: 
1st.  That  the  number  of  the  martyrs  was  not  as  great  as  it  is 
claimed;  2d.  That  the  motive  of  the  persecutions  was  politi- 
cal rather  than  religious ;  3d.  That  the  victims  suffered  more 
through  fanaticism  than  conviction. 

Reply  to  the  First  Objection. — 1st.  The  objection 
relative  to  the  number  of  the  martyrs  originated  in  the 
seventeenth  century  with  Dodwell,  an  English  Protestant, 
a  grave  historian  too;  Bayle  and  other  unbelievers  have 
merely  reproduced  his  arguments,  prudently  refraining, 
however,  from  mentioning  the  refutations  of  Macknight  and 
Burnet,  and  particularly  that  of  the  learned  Benedictine 
Dom  Ruinart.  Moreover,  Dodwell  himself  recognizes  that 
the  number  of  the  martyrs  is  great  enough  to  afford  a  striking 
proof  of  the  divinity  of  Christianity.  This  simple  acknowledg- 
ment may  suffice  us,  as  it  leaves  our  argument  untouched. 

2d.  Let  us  observe,  however,  that  all  the  arguments  of 
Dodwell  are  only  negativej  that  is,  drawn  from  the  silence  of 
other  authors,  and  consequently  prove  nothing  against  ours, 
which  are  positive^  that  is,  supported  by  authentic  testimony. 
Let  us  indicate  a  few  of  our  proofs. 

a.  Christian  tradition  has  always  represented  the  number 
of  the  martyrs  as  very  large.  It  is  the  unanimous  opinion  of 
the  ecclesiastical  writers  of  the  first  five  centuries;  in  their 
histories,  their  homilies,  their  apologies,  their  various  treat- 
ises, they  always  suppose  that  the  persecutions  created 
martyrs  without  number,  b.  Tacitus  affirms  that,  under 
Nero,  an  immense  number  of  Christians  perished.  c.  The 
historian  Eusebius  (fourth  century)  tells  us  that  under 
Marcus  Aurelius  the  hatred  and  rage  of  the  people  created 
an  almost  infinite  number  of  martyrs.  Among  the  ten 
books  of  the  History  written  by  Eusebius  there  is  not  one 
which  does  not  speak  of  the  persecutions  enkindled  under 


DIVINITY   OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  233 

the  various  emperors.  In  his  work  entitled ''The  Deaths  of 
the  Persecutors/^  Lactantius,  who  hved  during  the  persecu- 
tions of  Diocletian,  Maximus,  and  Galerius,  recalls  six  em- 
perors whose  tragic  end  seemed  to  be  the  effect  of  divine 
vengeance.  ''All  the  earth,"  says  this  same  writer,  "was 
cruelly  tormented;  the  East  and  West,  with  the  exception  of 
the  Gauls,  were  ravaged  and  devoured  by  three  monsters. '^ 
d.  According  to  tradition,  the  number  of  martyrs  under 
Diocletian  and  Maximus  amounted  to  two  millions.  This 
persecution  was  so  terrible  that  these  emperors  boasted  of 
having  exterminated  Christianity:  Nomine  Christianorum 
deleto;  superstitione  Christi  uhique  deleta,  ran  the  inscription 
on  their  medals.  Now,  when  they  ascended  the  throne, 
Christianity  flourished  throughout  the  empire,  hence  they 
must  have  shed  torrents  of  Christian  blood,  e.  It  is  true 
that  from  the  year  64  to  313  the  Church  had  frequently 
years  of  reprieve,  God  not  wishing,  says  Origen,  the  race  of 
Christians  to  be  wholly  destroyed;  but  we  know  also  that  in 
the  intervals  between  the  great  persecutions  the  edicts  of  the 
emperors  were  never  revoked;  their  execution  depended  upon 
the  will  of  the  governors  of  the  province,  who  were  not  by 
any  means  always  merciful. 

What  does  the  silence  of  writers  who  were  not  obliged  to 
speak  of  our  martyrs  prove  against  such  arguments? 

Reply  to  the  Second  Objection. — 1st.  If  there  is  any 
foundation  for  this  accusation,  why  is  it  that  neither  its  authors 
nor  writers  in  the  ranks  of  unbelievers,  offer  any  serious  argu- 
ment in  support  of  the  statement?  If  it  be  true,  pagan 
authors  of  the  period,  the  edicts  of  the  emperors,  the  replies 
of  the  apologists  ought  to  furnish  many  clear  and  decisive 
proofs.  No  doubt  the  heads  of  the  empire,  who  were  both 
rulers  and  pontiffs,  had  reason  to  fear  that  a  change  of  religion 
would  diminish  their  power;  and  history  shows  that  the 
persecutions  were  intended  solely  to  prevent  the  introduc- 
tion of  a  new  religion,  and  not  the  alleged  crimes  of  the  Chris- 
tians.   "The  Emperor  Decius,"   says  St.  Cyprian,  "would 


234  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

have  been  less  alarmed  at  a  competitor  for  his  throne  than 
at  a  rival  in  his  'priesthood.''^  If  the  Christians  were  regarded 
as  enemies  to  the  State,  it  was  exclusively  because  of  their 
religion,  and  not  because  of  offences  against  the  govern- 
ment. 

2d.  St.  Justin,  Athenagoras,  Minutius  Felix,  St.  Clement 
of  Alexandria,  Tertullian,  Origen,  and  St.  Cyprian,  in  their 
apologies  addressed  to  the  emperors,  the  magistrates,  to  all 
the  people,  boldly  affirm  that  no  crime,  no  sedition,  no  viola- 
tion of  civil  law  or  public  order  can  be  imputed  to  the  Chris- 
tians; they  challenge  their  enemies  to  prove  the  contrary; 
they  reproach  the  pagans  with  their  severity  against  the 
innocent,  with  putting  to  death  peaceful,  law-abiding  citizens, 
enemies  of  tumult  and  sedition,  who  can  be  accused  of  no 
crime  but  refusing  to  offer  incense  to  false  gods.  Now 
their  statement  was  never  denied,  their  challenge  was  never 
accepted. 

3d.  In  addition  to  this  we  have  the  declarations  of  pagan 
writers  themselves.  Tacitus'  only  charge  against  the  Chris- 
tians is  pernicious  superstition:  exitiahilis  super  stitio; 
Suetonius  relates  that,  in  the  Christians,  Nero  punished  a 
sect  given  over  to  a  perverse  and  hurtful  superstition:  super- 
stitionis  pravae  et  maleficae.  Thus  the  pagans  taxed  the 
Christians  with  impiety  toward  the  gods,  which  they  re- 
garded as  the  cause  of  the  scourges  and  public  calamities 
which  visited  the  empire.  Celsus,  Julian,  Libianus,  make 
no  other  charge  against  them;  Pliny  also  speaks  only  of  their 
perverse  and  excessive  superstition:  pravam  et  immodicarrij 
he  says  in  his  famous  letter  to  Trajan.  He  declares  that  he 
does  not  know  what  they  punish  in  the  Christians;  he  is 
even  flattering  in  his  commendation  of  them,  and  his  praise 
of  their  irreproachable  conduct  is  confirmed  in  the  em- 
peror's reply  to  his  letter.  We  do  not  speak  of  vague  accusa- 
tions formulated  by  one  or  two  pagan  authors,  in  which  no 
crime  is  mentioned,  unless  that  of  infanticide,  which  accusa- 
tion we  know  was  based  upon  a  misapprehension  of  the 


DIVINITY  OP  THE  CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  235 

Eucharist;  but  never,  despite  the  challenge  of  the  apologists, 
was  it  possible  to  verify  the  accusation  with  a  single  fact. 

4th.  The  persecuting  emperors  themselves  acknowledged 
the  innocence  of  the  Christians,  since  the  cause  of  religion  was 
the  only  motive  they  alleged  in  justification  of  their  severe 
edicts.  Diocletian  and  Maximus,  particularly,  make  no 
other  accusation  against  the  Christians  than  that  of  having 
renounced  the  worship  of  the  gods.  We  know  that  Trajan, 
in  his  answer  to  Pliny,  desires  that  the  Christians  be  punished, 
but  only  those  who  shall  be  denoimced  to  the  tribunals; 
he  forbids  the  others  to  be  pursued  or  sought  after:  this  is 
a  tacit  declaration  of  their  innocence. 

5th.  There  is,  moreover,  a  very  simple  means  of  getting 
at  the  truth  on  this  subject.  We  have  only  to  read  the  au- 
thentic ''Acts  of  the  Martyrs."  Neither  in  the  questions 
of  the  examiners  nor  in  the  sentence  of  the  judges  do  we  find 
any  trace  of  proven  crime;  when  they  are  brought  before 
the  tribimals,  when  they  are  condemned  to  death,  it  is  because 
they  refuse  to  adore  the  gods,  that  is,  because  they  are  Chris- 
tians. Finally,  here  is  a  proof  which  may  dispense  with  all 
the  others:  in  all  the  persecutions,  the  accused,  to  be 
pardoned,  to  be  laden  with  honors  and  rewards,  had  only 
to  make  one  act  of  idolatry.  "The  Christians,"  says  Origen, 
"are  the  only  culprits  whom  the  magistrates  will  dismiss, 
if  they  will  abjure  their  religion,  offer  sacrifice,  and  take  the 
usual  oaths."  ^ 

Reply  to  the  Third  Objection. — ^We  have  already 
replied  to  it  in  the  preceding  remarks.    It  is  truly  lamentable 

^  P.  Houze,  after  stating  and  examining  the  different  causes  alleged 
to  have  produced  the  persecutions,  concludes  that  "none  of  these 
causes  suffices  to  explain  the  persecution,  and  that  the  true,  decisive, 
and  fundamental  reason  is  that  given  in  the  forcible  language  of  Bos- 
suet  :  *  All  the  senses,  all  the  passions,  all  worldly  interests  fought  for 
idolatry.  It  is  the  eternal  history  of  the  struggle  of  evil  against 
good.  Perverse  man  would  slay,  would  annihilate  all  that  restrains 
his  passions.  Cain  slew  Abel;  the  Pharisees  slew  Christ;  the  wicked 
of  all  ages  would  slay  the  Church  which  is  the  body  of  Christ.' " 


236  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

to  find  modern  unbelief  more  unjust  toward  the  heroes  of 
Christianity  than  their  very  persecutors.  It  does  not  hesi- 
tate to  tax  with  madness  men  whose  intrepid  constancy 
wrested  admiration  from  the  pagans  themselves.  Fanaticism 
is  a  favorite  expression  of  unbelievers  when  they  speak  of 
Catholics.  It  does  not  dispense  them,  however,  from  being 
logical.  In  truth,  simple  common  sense  tells  us  clearly 
enough  that  there  can  be  no  question  here  of  fanaticism, 
that  is,  of  that  conviction  unsupported  by  proof,  that  blind 
devotion  inspired  by  passion,  limited  to  time  and  place. 
Contemplate  this  multitude  of  men  and  women,  youths  and 
maidens,  old  men  and  children,  as  well  as  converted  soldiers, 
magistrates,  philosophers,  who,  in  numerous  countries,  and 
for  nearly  three  centuries,  endured  with  the  utmost  calmness, 
midst  the  jeers  of  the  multitude,  excruciating,  frequently 
prolonged  torments:  what  indication  of  passion,  of  pride,  of 
ambition,  of  hatred,  of  vengeance  do  we  find  in  them?  ^  Who 
can  seriously  believe  that  they  sacrificed  everything,  life 
itself,  except  for  well-grounded  convictions?  Certainly  it 
was  no  present,  palpable  end  for  which  they  died,  hence  they 
could  look  for  the  reward  of  their  sacrifice  only  beyond  the 
tomb.  But  the  hope  of  such  a  reward  necessarily  supposes 
supernatural  faith  supported  by  the  most  convincing  proofs. 

VIII.  Eighth  Proof. 

THE  MARVELLOUS  FRUITS   OF  CHRISTIANITY,  OR  THE  WONDER- 
FUL REVOLUTION  WHICH  IT  EFFECTED  IN  THE  WORLD.  ^ 

This  proof  founded  upon  the  benefits  which  the  world 
reaped  from  Christianity  requires  much  development.     We 

^  On  the  contrast  between  Christian  martyrs  and  pagan  heroes  see 
A.  Butler,  Lives  of  the  Saints,  Dec.  12. 

^  Allies  (Formation) ;  Thebaud  (Church  and  Moral  World) ;  Balmes' 
ch.  14;  Chateaubriand;  Baluffi;  Delacroix,  Benefits  of  Religion; 
Spalding,  J.  L.,  lect.  9;  Lacordaire,  Conf.  21-28,  Effects  of  Cath. 
Doctrine  upon  the  Soul;  Archbp.  Hughes,  vol.  i.;  A.  C.  Q.  iv.  389, 


DIVINITY   OF   THE    CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  237 

shall  reserve  it  for  Chapter  V.  in  the  second  part  of  our 
work,  where  we  shall  speak  of  the  civilization  effected  by  the 
Church,  and  where  we  shall  show  that  the  Catholic  Church, 
that  is,  true  Christianity,  has  completely  transformed  the 
family,  the  individual,  civil  society,  international  relations, 
the  Roman  world,  and  the  world  of  barbarism.  Let  us 
confine  ourselves  for  the  moment  to  a  few  facts,  which  amply 
suffice  for  our  purpose. 

1.  State  of  the  World  before  Christ. — Let  us  observe, 
first,  that  it  is  almost  impossible  for  us  who  five  in  the  light 
of  the  Gospel,  in  the  bosom  of  a  society  reformed  and  purified 
by  so  many  centuries  of  the  Church,  to  form  an  accurate 
idea  of  the  state  of  the  pagan  world  before  the  coming  of 
Christ.  The  grossness  of  its  customs  is  almost  incredible  in 
the  present  age. 

Everywhere,  except  among  the  Jewish  people,  uncertainty 
and  the  grossest  errors  prevailed  in  regard  to  the  truths  most 
important  to  man,  and  which  form  the  basis  of  intellectual  and 
moral  life.  Only  one  nation  adored  the  true  God;  in  every 
other  part  of  the  world  men  bowed  in  adoration  before  the 
stars,  plants,  imclean  animals,  before  gods  of  wood  or  stone 
fashioned  by  their  own  hands.  The  world  was  one  vast 
temple  of  idols,  and,  according  to  the  forcible  expression  of 
Bossuet,  everything  was  worshipped  as  God  except  God 
Himself.  And  let  us  not  imagine  that  the  most  pohshed  and 
learned  nations  were  less  degraded  than  the  imcivilized 
world.  Persia  adored  the  sun;  Egypt  its  ox.  Apis;  Ephesus 
had  its  great  Diana,  Delos  its  Apollo,  and  Rome,  even  in  its 
golden  age  of  Hterature  and  art,  raised  to  earthly  gods,  to 
the  most  cruel  as  well  as  the  most  infamous,  the  famous 
temple  (Pantheon:  to  all  gods)  which  still  stands  and  wit- 
nesses with  its  cross-crowned  summit  to  the  victory  of  Christ 
over  the  idols  of  the  world. 

We  know  that  public  and  private  morals  were  in  keeping 

ix.  358,  X.  478,  696,  xiii.  405;  D.  R.  New  Ser.  viii.  456,  III.  Ser.  i.  26; 
C.  W.  V.  363.     Cf.  also  references  below,  F.  II.,  ch.  5. 


238  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

with  such  a  worship.  Man,  forgetful  of  his  origin  and  his 
sublime  destiny,  lowered  himself  to  the  level  of  the  brute,  or, 
in  the  delirium  of  his  pride,  raised  himself  to  the  rank  of  the 
gods.  Morality  having  no  basis,  men  lived  shameless  lives 
in  imitation  of  the  gods  themselves.  Every  passion  had  its 
altar.  Human  dignity,  justice,  modesty,  the  most  sacred 
laws  were  everywhere  despised  and  trodden  under  foot. 
Oppression  and  tyranny  ruled  in  high  places,  enslaving  and 
degrading  the  people. 

Let  us  quote  a  page  from  Mgr.  Gaume,  who  sums  up  the 
painful  picture  everywhere  presented  by  pagan  society 
(Histoire  de  la  famille) : 

''The  bonds  of  religious  society  which  unite  man  to  God 
had  been  broken.  Separated  from  God,  man  and  woman 
had  lost  the  appreciation  of  their  natural  dignity,  and  had 
fallen  under  the  despotic  empire  of  sensuahty.  They  had 
made  themselves,  after  the  image  of  the  gods  created  by 
their  passions,  cruel  and  voluptuous.  From  their  brow  had 
fallen  the  crown  of  glory  which  the  hand  of  the  Creator  had 
placed  there ;  bhnded  by  the  mist  of  passions,  they  had  seated 
themselves  in  the  dust;  forgetting  what  they  were,  what 
they  should  be,  they  ceased  to  appreciate  their  true  worth. 
Hence  arose  in  pagan  antiquity  man's  universal  contempt 
for  his  fellow  being  and  for  himself. 

"Contempt  for  humanity  prevailed  everywhere:  for  the 
infant,  who  was  pitilessly  strangled,  exposed  to  death, 
immolated;  for  the  prisoner,  who  was  reduced  to  slavery, 
forced  to  die  on  the  tomb  of  his  conqueror  or  in  the  amphi- 
theatre; for  the  poor,  who  were  driven  forth  like  unclean 
animals;  for  the  slave,  who  was  laden  with  chains,  over- 
whelmed with  painful  labors,  thrown  as  food  to  the  lions 
and  to  the  tigers,  or  killed  at  the  caprice  of  his  master; 
for  woman,  who  was  bought,  rejected,  sold,  and  dishonored 
in  every  way. 

"Man's  contem,pt  for  himself  was  shown  by  his  abuse 
of  his  intelhgence,  which  he  fed  with  the  most  shameful, 


DIVINITY   OF   THE    CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  239 

the  grossest,  the  most  cruel  errors,  or  with  vain  knowledge, 
sterile  as  regarded  his  true  good;  of  his  heart,  which  he  de- 
graded by  the  most  brutal,  the  most  humihating  affections; 
of  his  senses,  which  he  prostituted  without  pity,  making 
them  minister  to  every  form  of  iniquity ;  of  his  life,  which  he 
did  not  hesitate  to  end  by  the  sword  or  poison,  or  to  sell  to 
whomsoever  would  possess  it,  whether  to  abuse  or  destroy  it. 

"As  to  society,  it  had  become,  like  its  members,  filled 
with  crime  and  misery,  the  strong  ever  preying  on  the  weak. 
The  State  everything,  the  individual  nothing;  the  citizen,  so 
far  from  being  really  free,  existed  only  for  the  mighty  god, 
the  State,  whose  commands  were  to  be  held  as  just  and 
wise,  even  though  they  were  the  expression  of  the  most 
flagrant  injustice  and  odious  tyranny." 

Such  was  the  state  of  degradation  and  corruption  in  which 
the  world  was  plunged  before  the  coming  of  Christ.  And 
observe  well,  the  legislators,  the  poets,  the  orators,  the 
philosophers  never  dreamed  of  doing  aught  to  lift  it  from 
the  gulf  into  which  it  was  sinking  deeper  and  deeper.  Not 
unfrequently  they  were  the  first  to  give  the  example  of 
every  vice.  Men  were  so  accustomed  to  the  cruel  and  de- 
praved morality  of  the  age  that  neither  philosophy  nor 
history  uttered  a  protest  against  these  unparalleled  dis- 
orders, a  tenth  part  of  which  would  revolt  any  Christian  of 
the  present  day. 

A  few  philosophers,  aided  by  the  light  of  natural  reason, 
had  given  utterance  to  true  and  elevating  conceptions  of 
God,  the  soul,  the  true,  the  good;  but  their  doctrine  contained 
also  gross  errors  upon  the  essence  of  the  divine  nature  and 
the  destiny  of  the  human  soul.  At  the  same  time  there 
existed,  even  in  the  best  minds,  cold  and  enervating  doubt 
of  the  most  fundamental  notions,  which  necessarily  stifled  any 
spirit  of  propagandism.  What  could  be  expected,  for  ex- 
ample, from  a  thinker  Hke  Cicero,  who,  after  arguing  at  some 
length,  in  his  Tusculanae  Disputationes  upon  the  proofs  of 
the  immortality  of  the  soul,  lets  his  pen  fall  with  this  dis- 


240  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS 

heartening  avowal:  ^'How  is  this  accomphshed?  I  know 
not;  but  when  I  read  these  arguments  I  am  convinced;  then 
when  I  lay  down  the  book  and  set  myself  to  reflect,  all  my 
conviction  vanishes.'' 

At  all  events,  the  doctrine  of  the  philosophers,  the  ex- 
clusive possession  of  a  few  sages,  never  reached  the  masses. 
While  Epicurism  hastened  the  progress  of  moral  corruption, 
Stoicism,  notwithstanding  its  relative  merit,  did  nothing  to 
arrest  it.  ''Devoid  of  that  proselyting  spirit  which  makes 
apostles  and  martyrs,  it  was  incapable  of  descending  to  the 
masses,  to  revive  among  them  the  expiring  flame  of  virtue. 
Moreover,  in  preaching  the  apathy  of  the  sage,  and  in  re- 
ducing life  to  a  sad  and  silent  contemplation  of  events,  it 
destroyed  man's  interest  in  the  duties  of  social  life  and 
enveloped  him  in  an  egotism  filled  with  pride.  It  produced 
a  few  solitary  and  sterile  virtues ;  it  could  do  nothing  for  the 
happiness  of  humanity,  and  despotism  made  the  most  of 
this  philosophy  of  despair  which  abandoned  the  world  to  its 
power. " 

2.  The  World  after  the  Coming  of  Christ. — No  one 
can  ignore  the  marvellous  change  which  was  wrought  in  the 
world  after  the  cross  had  been  planted  on  the  summit  of 
Calvary.  Let  us  be  content  to  sum  up  in  a  few  words  the 
principal  benefits  we  owe  to  Him  who  proclaimed  Himself, 
with  justice,  ''the  Way,  the  Truth,  and  the  Life." 

1st.  By  means  of  the  new  religion  which  was  brought  to 
the  world  not  only  the  Romans  and  the  Greeks,  but  even 
the  most  barbarous  nations,  received  the  light  of  the  Gospel; 
the  grossest  classes,  those  whom  ancient  philosophy  judged 
unfit  for  instruction,  were  enlightened  by  the  torch  of 
truth,  and  the  people  acquired,  concerning  a  large  number 
of  essential  truths,  a  certainty  which  the  most  celebrated 
philosophers  never  possessed.  These  capital  truths,  which 
are  the  solid  foundation  of  all  morality,  of  all  virtue,  of 
society  itself,  were  spread  throughout  the  world,  and  became, 
so  to  speak,  an  integral  part  of  modern  society,  so  that  it  is 


DIVINITY  OF  THE   CHKISTIAN  RELIGION.  241 

difficult  to  imagine  how  it  ever  existed  without  them.  This, 
moreover,  is  one  of  the  characters  by  which  Christ  wished 
us  to  recognize  the  divinity  of  His  mission:  "  the  poor  have 
the  gospel  preached  to  them  "  (Matth.  xi.  5). 

2d.  Truth  begets  virtue.  In  substituting  the  worship  and 
adoration  of  the  true  God  in  spirit  and  in  truth  for  the  intel- 
lectual darkness  and  secular  errors  which  prevailed  in  the  old 
world,  Christianity  gave  birth  to  the  virtues  which  sanctify 
and  honor  humanity.  We  have  seen  them  developed  in 
every  age,  every  clime,  and  even  in  the  most  depraved  sur- 
roundings; there  is  no  age,  no  condition,  no  class  of  society 
which,  under  the  all-powerful  breath  of  grace,  has  not  pro- 
duced marvels  of  moral  greatness  and  superhuman  sanctity. 
3d.  The  influence  of  Christianity  was  not  confined  to  the 
individual  sanctification  of  its  members ;  it  purified,  moralized 
the  pubhc  conscience  itself.  The  heart  of  the  pagan  world 
was  vowed  to  the  worship  of  brute  force,  and  closed  by  a  hard 
and  pitiless  egotism  to  every  good  and  noble  sentiment,  yet 
under  the  softening  influence  of  Christianity  it  not  only  ac- 
quired respect  for  law  and  justice,  but  the  gentle  virtues  of 
mercy  and  charity ;  the  poor,  the  weak,  the  suffering,  formerly 
objects  of  contempt,  were  respected  and  cared  for.  There 
arose  for  the  solace  of  every  kind  of  human  misery  noble 
institutions,  supported  by  the  most  subHme  devotion. 

4th.  At  the  same  time,  and  as  it  were  necessarily,  the 
rehgion  of  Christ  replaced  the  pagan  legislation,  marked  by 
despotism  and  nameless  iniquities,  with  a  new  legislation, 
wholly  impregnated  with  the  spirit  of  its  Founder.^  By  its 
principle  of  the  divine  origin  of  authority  it  restored  the 
personal  nobility  of  man.  Without  anarchy  it  rescued 
man  from  the  despotic  and  brutahzing  yoke  of  man,  to 
subject  him  to  Him  from  whom  all  power  comes.  Thus 
it  healed  the  bleeding  and  humanly  incurable  woimds  of 
paganism:  slavery,  the  despotism  of  the  father  and  husband, 

» C.  W.  xiii.  342. 


242  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

the  tyranny  of  the  State,  which  absorbed  the  individual,  the 
barbarity  of  international  relations. 

Remarks. — To  these  incontestable  facts  let  us  add  a  few 
remarks  which  will  make  their  bearing  still  more  obvious : 

a.  This  marvellous  transformation,  impossible  by  merely 
natural  causes,  was  accompHshed  in  all  places  where  Chris- 
tianity could  be  estabUshed.  Nations,  whether  pagan  or 
barbarous,  savage  or  polished,  old  or  young,  all  felt  the 
salutary  influence  of  the  evangelical  doctrine  and  of  the 
heavenly  grace  which  accompanies  it. 

b.  Wherever  Christianity  did  not  reach,  the  same  state 
of  ancient  superstition,  of  gross  idolatry,  of  profound  im- 
morality, continued  unmodified.  Outside  of  nations  where 
the  cross  of  Christ  is  adored  we  do  not  find  a  single  people 
distinguished  by  its  civilization,  its  laws,  its  institutions,  its 
customs,  by  a  wisely  regulated  Hberty,  by  the  culture  of  the 
arts,  the  sciences,  and  letters — ^in  a  word,  by  its  moral  and 
intellectual  worth. 

c.  Regions  regenerated  by  Christianity,  for  example  in 
Africa  and  Asia,  have  fallen  back  into  their  primitive  degra- 
dation when  they  closed  their  eyes  to  the  fight,  and  for 
centuries  have  remained  stationary  in  the  darkness  to  which 
they  voluntarily  returned.  How  great  was  the  former 
renown  of  the  churches  where  echoed  the  voice  of  Athanasius, 
of  Cyril,  of  Chrysostom,  of  Cyprian,  of  Augustine!  Do  we 
not  find,  moreover,  in  the  very  bosom  of  nations  enfightened 
by  revelation  that  minds  fall  back  into  the  errors  of  paganism 
as  soon  as  they  reject  the  teachings  of  Christianity? 

Conclusion. — Such  are  the  certain  facts;  here  are  the 
necessary  consequences.  A  refigion  which  has  effected  mar- 
vels so  completely  beyond  human  power  cannot  be  the 
work  of  man;  it  must  come  from  God.*  Divine  fruits  reveal 
a  divine  tree,  a  divine  principle.  ''If  we  knew  nothing  of 
Christianity,"  says  August  Nicolas,  "neither  its  doctrine  nor 
its  history,  if  the  tree  and  its  roots  were  completely  con- 

*  Picard,  p.  II.,  ch.  1. 


DIVINITY   OF   THE   CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  243 

cealed,  and  only  the  fruits  apparent  to  us,  we  should  have 
been  obliged  to  acknowledge  that  these  fruits  are  not  those 
which  the  earth  bears,  that  they  are  nourished  by  a  super- 
natural source." 

IX.  Ninth  Proof. 

THE   DOCTRINAL  TEACHING   OF   CHRIST. 

Observation. — All  the  proofs  heretofore  stated  suffice  of 
themselves  to  estabhsh  the  divinity  of  Christianity,  for  the 
reason  that  they  are  supported  by  incontestable  miracles, 
and  consequently  by  the  irrefutable  testimony  of  God. 

It  is  otherwise  with  the  two  proofs  which  we  are  about  to 
state.  The  great  virtue  of  an  apostle  and  the  elevation  and 
purity  of  his  teaching,  considered  by  themselves,  do  not 
constitute  a  completely  convincing  proof  of  a  (fivine  mission. 
In  truth,  hypocrisy  and  fraud  may  assume  the  appearance 
of  true  sanctity.  Any  doctrine  whatever,  to  be  accepted 
by  mankind,  must  be  supported  by  divine  works;  these 
works  were  the  more  necessary  here  that  the  teacher  not  only 
proclaimed  Himself  God's  ambassador,  but  claimed  divine 
honors.  Thus  Jesus  Himself  announced  this  to  be  necessary 
when  He  said:  ''If  I  had  not  done  among  them  the  works 
that  no  other  man  hath  done,  they  would  not  have  sin  " 
(John  XV.  24). 

At  the  same  time  we  cannot  pass  over  in  silence  arguments 
which,  considered  in  themselves,  are  very  conclusive.  If 
they  do  not  constitute  a  complete  demonstration,  they  are 
none  the  less  a  distinctive  mark  of  divine  revelation.  More- 
over, by  the  very  fact  that  they  are  supported  by  the  pre- 
ceding proofs  they  become  in  their  turn  incontestable. 
Furthermore,  being  very  clear  and  easily  apprehended  they 
make  a  deep  and  legitimate  impression  on  the  majority  of 
minds  and  prepare  them  to  hear  favorably  and  to  study 
attentively  more  solid,  but  perhaps  less  attractive,  reasons. 

Here  is  the  reason  upon  which  the  ninth  proof  is  based: 


244  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

It  is  manifestly  evident  that  the  doctrine  of  Christ  in  dogma, 
in  moral  teaching,  and  in  worship,  is  of  superhurnan  perfec- 
tion. This  is  still  more  apparent  when  we  consider  the 
circumstances  under  which  it  was  announced  to  the  world. 
The  doctrine  therefore  comes  from  God,  and  consequently 
Jesus  is  God's  ambassador. 

The  doctrine  of  Our  Saviour  is  almost  wholly  contained  in 
the  gospels.  A  large  part  of  the  teaching  given  His  disciples, 
either  during  His  life  or  after  His  Resurrection,  was  con- 
signed to  the  other  books  of  the  New  Testament  or  books  of 
tradition.  We  cannot  do  more  than  sketch  here  the  principal 
points  of  this  doctrine ;  the  development  of  it  belongs  to  that 
part  of  theology  called  Special  Dogma  and  Moral  Theology. 

THE  DOGMATIC  TEACHING  OF  CHRIST. 

A  Doctrine  of  Jesus  concerning  God. — God  is  a  Being 
by  Himself,  without  beginning  or  end,  existing  from  all  eter- 
nity through  the  necessity  of  His  nature,  and  possessing 
all  perfections  in  an  infinite  degree ;  by  His  almighty  power 
to  which  nothing  is  impossible.  He  has  created  out  of 
nothing  all  that  exists,  and  thus  He  is  the  principle,  the 
centre,  and  the  end  of  all  things;  by  His  immensity  He 
is  completely  present  in  every  place,  yet  cannot  be  con- 
tained in  space;  He  is  in  us  and  we  are  in  Him;  in  Him 
and  through  Him  we  live  and  move  and  have  our 
being;  nothing  can  escape  His  omniscience:  the  past,  the 
present,  the  future,  the  beings  purely  possible,  the  future 
determinations  of  beings  endowed  with  free  will,  all  are 
present  to  the  divine  thought  in  an  eternal  and  immutable 
present.  By  His  providence,  as  full  of  wisdom  as  of  love, 
He  watches  over  all  beings,  causing  them  to  serve  His  glory 
and  leading  them  to  the  end  He  has  assigned  them,  unless 
they  voluntarily  place  an  obstacle  to  His  designs.  Nothing 
happens  in  this  world  without  His  order  or  permission. 
Not  a  hair  falls  from  our  head  without  the  consent  of  our 
heavenly  Father.     His  sanctity  regards  the  smallest  iniquity 


DIVINITY  OF  THE   CHKISTIAN  RELIGION.  245 

with  the  greatest  horror.  His  justice  punishes  and  re- 
wards each  one  according  to  his  merit:  He  does  not 
permit  a  glass  of  water  given  in  His  name  to  go  unre- 
warded. 

What  is  particularly  remarkable  here  in  the  teaching  of 
Jesus  is  the  manner  in  which  He  dwells  upon  the  mercy  and 
goodness  of  God.  These  divine  attributes,  of  which  the 
pagans  had  not  the  sHghtest  knowledge,  were  not,  it  is  true, 
imknown  to  the  Jews.  To  them,  however,  God  was  par- 
ticularly the  sovereign  Master,  the  all-powerful  Lord,  to  be 
adored  and  feared;  but  to  the  disciples  of  Jesus  He  is,  above 
all.  Goodness  by  essence,  "God  is  charity"  (1  John  iv.  8);  He 
is  a  tender,  compassionate  Father,  who  asks  our  love,  who 
knows  the  weakness  of  His  children  and  has  pity  on  their 
misery.  By  His  grace,  which  He  has  promised  never  to  refuse 
to  their  prayers,  and  by  the  sacraments  which  He  has  in- 
stituted in  His  Church  and  which  are  admirably  adapted  to 
their  needs,  He  never  ceases  to  strengthen  them,  and,  if 
they  fall,  to  help  them  to  rise  again,  and  to  renew  their 
strength  in  the  path  of  heaven.  God  is  the  Good  Shepherd 
who  goes  in  search  of  the  lost  sheep;  and  when  He  finds  it, 
tenderly  bears  it  upon  His  shoulders,  sparing  it  the  fatigue 
of  the  way.  Again,  He  is  the  Father  of  the  prodigal  son, 
whom  He  receives  after  long  years  of  weary  waiting,  with 
unheard-of  tenderness,  for  "there  shall  be  joy  in  heaven 
upon  one  sinner  that  doth  penance,  more  than  upon  ninety- 
nine  just  who  need  not  penance"  (Luke  xv.  7).  ^ 

*  We  cannot  resist  the  desire  to  make  a  remark  here;  it  is  somewhat 
long,  perhaps,  but  we  regard  it  as  very  important.  The  thought  of 
this  love  of  God  for  man,  a  thought  which  is  the  sweetest  joy  to  the 
heart  and  the  greatest  consolation  in  the  trials  of  life,  is  of  great 
importance  in  determining  our  faith  in  the  mysteries  of  revelation; 
for  the  supreme  reason  of  these  mysteries  is  that  which  Christ  Him- 
self has  given  us:  "God  so  loved  the  world  as  to  give  His  only- 
begotten  Son"  (John  iii.  16).  To  believe  in  such  a  love  is  to 
believe  in  Christianity,  which  is  its  result,  or  rather  which  is  this 
love  itself.    Thus  the  beloved  disciple  presents  us  no  other  motive 


246  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

To  the  dogma  of  the  unity  of  God  so  clearly  taught  in  the 
Old  Testament,  and  verified,  moreover,  by  simple  reason, 
Jesus  adds  others  of  which  the  Jews  themselves  had  only  a 
confused  and  incomplete  knowledge.  He  it  was  who  revealed 
in  an  explicit  manner  the  ineffable  dogmas  of  the  Holy  Trinity, 
of  the  Incarnation  of  the  Word,  of  the  Redemption  of  the 
world. 

Adam  had  sinned  and  infinite  justice  claimed  a  satisfaction 
worthy  of  God's  offended  majesty.     This  satisfaction  was 

of  faith:  "We  have  known  and  have  believed  the  charity  which 
God  hath  to  us;  God  is  charity"  (1  John  iv.  16);  for  in  order  to 
believe  we  must  will  to  believe.*  The  will  is  a  necessary  part  in  an 
act  of  faith,  which  is  an  act  of  virtue,  consequently  a  free  act.  The 
motives  of  belief  which  we  are  stating  at  present  do  not,  despite 
their  direct  and  convincing  character,  render  doubt  impossible; 
they  make  it  only  unreasonable.  Now  that  which  most  powerfully 
determines  the  will  is  love  excited  by  love.  It  was  the  consideration 
of  the  love  of  God  for  His  creature  which  decided  the  conversion  of 
the  great  and  beautiful  soul  worthy  to  be  praised  by  Bossuet.  The 
Palatine  princess  to  whom  he  refers  in  his  funeral  oration  of  Anne 
de  Gonzague  was  so  wholly  without  faith  that  to  convince  her  of  the 
truth  of  Christianity  would  be,  as  she  declared,  the  greatest  of  mira- 
cles. Yet  this  miracle  took  place.  How  did  faith  enter  a  soul  so 
firmly  closed  against  it?  "When  it  pleased  God,"  she  says,  "to  put 
in  my  heart  the  thought  that  His  love  is  the  cause  of  all  we  believe, 
it  convinced  me  more  than  all  the  books  I  had  read.  One  can,  in 
fact,  readily  believe  that  a  God  who  loves  infinitely  gives  proofs 
proportioned  to  the  infinity  of  His  love  and  proportioned  to  the 
infinity  of  His  power,  which  far  exceeds  the  capacity  of  our  weak 
reason."  This  explains  the  Incarnation,  the  Redemption,  and  the 
cross  of  Our  Saviour;  it  explains  the  sacraments,  and  particularly  the 
adorable  Eucharist,  where  Christ,  great  as  He  is,  carries  His  love 
for  us  so  far  as  to  become  the  Companion  of  our  exile,  our  Food,  and 
our  Victim  (John  xiii.  1;  Gal.  ii.  20).  This  explains  the  touching  in- 
troduction of  the  prayer  which  Our  Saviour  taught  His  apostles: 
"Our  Father,  who  art  in  heaven."  The  Lord's  Prayer,  properly 
understood,  suffices  of  itself  to  show  the  superiority  of  Christianity 
over  all  religions  of  human  origin. 

Let  us  add  a  remark  which  will  make  what  we  have  said  still  better 

*  Ward,  W.,  The  Wish  to  Believe. 


DIVINITY  OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  247 

given,  but  where  ''sin  abounded  grace  did  more  abound." 
God  created  all  things  by  His  Word ;  and  by  this  same  Word 
He  restored  all  things.  God  imprinted  His  Ukeness  in  man 
at  the  moment  of  his  creation.  He  went  so  far  as  to  assume 
our  likeness  to  raise  us  more  efficaciously  from  our  degrada- 
tion. Thus  God  not  only  did  not  abandon  humanity  after 
the  fall  of  the  first  man,  but  He  drew  good  from  evil,  and  by 
a  miracle  of  love,  greater  than  that  of  the  creation,  and  than 
that  of  our  elevation  to  the  supernatural  order.  He  con- 
tracted with  humanity  an  ineffable  imion,  the  highest  and 
most  intimate  union  possible.  The  Second  Person  of  the 
Holy  Trinity,  the  Son,  in  all  things  equal  to  the  Father  and 

understood.  Faith  consists  in  cleaving  to  God  and  to  His  word; 
it  is  a  joyful  and  trustful  abandonment  of  our  judgment  to  the  divine 
intelligence.  Convinced  of  the  infallible  wisdom  of  God,  imbued, 
above  all,  with  His  ineffable  tenderness  for  us,  we  have  no  desire  to 
analyze  the  motives  of  our  faith.  We  are  like  a  child  who  relies 
with  absolute  confidence  on  the  words  of  his  father,  not  only  because 
his  father  possesses  knowledge  which  he  is  without,  but  because  he 
knows  that  his  father  loves  him  and  finds  his  happiness  in  teaching 
him  the  truth.  The  devils  have  unalterable  faith;  they  believe 
revealed  truths  with  absolute  certainty,  but  their  faith  is  a  cold, 
rational  deduction.  Very  different  is  the  faith  of  the  children  of 
God.  It  is  not  the  result  of  cold,  metaphysical  infallibility;  it  is,  if  it 
may  be  so  expressed,  a  loving  and  beloved  infallibility  to  which  they 
cleave.  They  know  that  if,  by  any  possibility,  God  could  be  de- 
ceived. He  would  not  deceive  His  children,  because  they  are  His 
children  and  He  is  their  Father,  and  He  wishes  to  give  them  Truth 
as  the  first  of  all  blessings,  and  the  foundation  of  all  others.  The 
knowledge  of  this  disposition  on  the  part  of  God  excites  confidence 
in  the  faithful,  and  confidence  begets  faith,  a  loving  allegiance  of  the 
children  of  God  to  the  word  of  their  Father,  who  speaks  to  them  in 
love  in  order  to  put  them  in  possession  of  the  truth.  What  we 
have  just  said  serves  also  to  explain  why  sincere  study  is  not  sufficient 
to  lead  heretics  or  unbelievers  to  the  faith;  prayer  must  be  added  to 
study,  because,  in  addition  to  supernatural  light,  it  obtains  the  grace 
which  makes  them  love  truth  and  its  Author,  and  cleave  joyfully  to 
the  word  of  Our  Father  in  heaven.* 

*  Ward,  1.  c;  Manning,  Internal  Mission  of  H.  Gh.,  ch.  3;  Newman,  Discourses  to 
Mixed  Congr.,  9.  10. 


248  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

the  Holy  Spirit,  was  united  hypostatically,  that  is,  in  unity 
of  person,  to  a  human  nature  Hke  our  own  in  all  respects 
save  sin.  Through  His  human  nature  Jesus  could  suffer  and 
die;  through  His  divine  nature  He  imparted  infinite  value 
to  His  expiatory  sufferings.  Thus  there  was  offered  to  the 
offended  majesty  of  God  a  reparation  worthy  of  His  supreme 
greatness.     Thus  justice  and  mercy  were  reconciled. 

B.  Doctrine  of  Jesus  Christ  concerning  Man. — This 
doctrine  is  neither  less  admirable  nor  less  touching  than 
that  concerning  God.  Created  to  the  image  of  the  Most 
High,  and  adorned  at  once  with  sanctifying  grace  which 
imparts  to  him  supernatural  life  and  a  sort  of  participation 
in  the  life  of  God  Himself,  man's  sublime  mission  was  to 
know,  to  love,  and  to  serve  in  this  world  his  Creator  and 
Father.  In  fulfilling  this  duty  so  necessary,  so  glorious  for 
man,  so  perfectly  conformable  to  reason,  he  was  sure  of 
attaining  his  supreme  destiny,  that  of  enjojdng  in  heaven 
the  full  possession  of  God,  of  sharing  his  infinite  happiness 
for  all  eternity. 

God^s  will  was  that  this  original  justice,  this  sanctifying 
grace  which  made  the  first  man  most  pleasing  to  Him,  should 
pass  to  his  posterity;  but  Adam  could  transmit  it  only  on 
condition  of  preserving  it  himself  by  his  fidelity  to  his  Creator. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  inheritance  of  heaven  being  assigned 
him  as  a  glorious  reward  of  his  free  obedience,  it  was  need- 
ful that  this  obedience  be  put  to  the  test.  God  therefore 
addressed  a  prohibition  to  Adam  with  a  formal  command  to 
respect  it.  The  observance  of  this  command,  which,  more- 
over, was  light,  was  to  be  an  acknowledgment  of  God's 
sovereign  dominion,  an  authentic  proof  of  the  creature  ^s  free 
submission  to  his  Creator,  of  the  child  to  his  father.  Our 
first  parents  disobeyed,  and  in  punishment  of  this  voluntary 
abuse  of  their  liberty  they  were  deprived  of  the  grace  which 
constituted  the  supernatural  fife  of  their  souls  and  rendered 
them  pleasing  to  God. 

Adam,  in  losing  through  his  own  fault  the  state  of  justice 


DIVINITY  OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  249 

and  original  innocence,  found  it  impossible  to  communicate 
it  to  his  posterity,  who,  by  the  free  disposition  of  God,  had 
been  made  dependent  on  the  head  of  humanity  for  super- 
natural as  well  as  natural  life.  Thus  a  father  ruined  by 
play,  or  outlawed  by  an  act  of  treason,  cannot  transmit  his 
title  and  fortune  to  his  children.  And  as,  according  to  the 
beneficent  will  of  God,  each  man  was  to  be  born  with  the 
dignity  of  son  by  adoption,  adorned  with  sanctifying 
grace,  the  privation  of  these  special  relations  of  friendship 
is  a  veritable  forfeiture  which,  resulting  from  a  culpable 
act,  makes  unregenerated  man  an  object  of  aversion  to 
God.i 

This  prevarication  of  our  first  parents  has  been  the  cause 
of  all  the  evils  from  which  humanity  suffers.  It  explains  the 
mystery  of  sorrow  and  of  death,  which  has  been  and  always 
will  be  the  despair  of  the  philosophy  which  rejects  faith. ^ 
The  loss  of  sanctifying  grace  entails  the  loss  of  other  super- 
natural gifts,  as  well  as  of  preternatural  or  extranatural 
prerogatives  which  God  had  generously  attached  to  this 
grace.  These  magnificent  privileges,  which  are  not  required 
by  our  nature,  but  which  constitute  its  integrity,  were, 
especially,  immortality,  exemption  from  suffering,  infused 
knowledge,  and  the  subjection  of  the  body  to  the  soul,  of  the 

*  According  to  the  teaching  of  theology  that  which  is  transmitted 
to  us  by  generation  is  evidently  not  the  personal  or  actual  sin  of 
Adam,  that  is,  the  act  by  which  he  transgressed  the  precept  of  the 
Lord ;  but  it  is  the  state  resulting  from  the  severance  of  the  relations 
of  supernatural  friendship  for  which  God  had  gratuitously  predestined 
Adam  and,  through  him,  all  his  posterity.  This  privation  of  the 
sanctifying  grace  which  was  to  make  us  the  children  of  God  being 
the  consequence,  not  of  personal  sin,  but  of  the  infidelity  of  the  head 
of  the  human  race,  those  who  die  in  original  sin  only  will  not,  it  is 
true,  enjoy  the  beatific  vision,  but  they  will  be  in  no  way  subject  to 
the  pains  of  sense.  This  is  the  opinion  of  St.  Thomas,  St.  Bonaven- 
ture,  Innocent  III.,  and  many  other  theologians.  See  also  below, 
P.  II.,  ch.  4,  art.  1,  iv. 

2  On  the  Existence  of  Evil  see  Boedder,  Nat.  Th.,  B.  III.,  ch.  2; 
Hunter,  II.,  n.  388  ff.;  I.  E.  R.  Oct.-Nov.  '99. 


250  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

appetites  to  reason.  Sin  entailed  the  loss  of  these  advan- 
tages. Man  found  himself  thenceforth  condemned  to  know 
death,  to  be  subject  to  ignorance,  to  infirmity,  to  disease,  and 
to  miseries  of  all  kinds.  The  harmony  which  existed  in  the 
beginning  between  the  superior  and  inferior  faculties  gave 
place  to  a  warfare  which  every  one  feels  within  his  breast; 
man,  having  criminally  withdrawn  from  the  obedience  which 
he  owed  to  God,  beheld,  by  a  just  return,  his  passions  rebel 
against  reason,  the  flesh  unceasingly  revolt  against  the  spirit 
instead  of  following  its  light ;  thus  virtue,  which  was  formerly 
sweet  and  easy,  became  for  us  an  object  of  noble  but  laborious 
strife.  We  see  that  the  evils  with  which  we  are  overwhelmed 
are  not  the  work  of  God,  but  the  work  of  man,  who  did  not 
preserve  the  prerogatives  with  which  he  was  endowed. 

But  human  nature  has  not  been  deprived  of  anything 
essential  to  it ;  this  is  the  teaching  of  the  Church  in  contradic- 
tion to  Protestants  and  Jansenists.  Let  us  further  bear  in 
mind  that  God  could,  without  injury  to  His  justice  or  His 
goodness,  have  created  man  as  he  is  to-day,  for  his  state  meets 
all  the  needs  of  his  nature,  his  condition  and  character  as  a 
reasonable  being. 

Appeased  by  the  blood  of  His  Son,  God,  as  we  have  said, 
gave  man  the  right  to  recover  the  sanctifying  grace  which 
permits  him  to  call  God  his  Father,  and  gives  him  a  claim 
to  the  inheritance  of  heaven.  This  grace,  the  principle  of 
supernatural  life,  is  offered  to  man  not  only  in  its  original 
fulness,  but  in  greatest  abundance  (John  x.  10).  At  the 
same  time  man  preserves  the  power  of  refusing  this  signal 
benefit,  for  he  preserves  free-will,  a  condition  of  merit.  If  he 
is  guilty  of  this  insensate  and  criminal  ingratitude,  if  he 
obstinately  repels  the  advances  of  divine  mercy  which 
unceasingly  invite  him  to  repentance  and  offer  him  pardon, 
he  can  attribute  his  eternal  loss  only  to  himself.  If  he 
accepts  with  gratitude  this  gift,  bought  at  an  infinite  price, 
it  is  through  the  grace  of  God  that  he  will  merit  the  prom- 
ised reward,  participation  in  the  infinite  happiness  of  the 


DIVINITY  OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  251 

divinity  itself.      ''By  the  grace  of  God  I  am  what  I  am'^ 
(1  Cor.  XV.  10). 

C.  Doctrine  of  Jesus  Christ  concerning  the  World. — 
In  creating  out  of  nothing  the  universe  which  surrounds  us, 
God,  the  infinitely  Wise,  the  only  Being  existing  from  all 
eternity,  must  necessarily  have  had  in  view  an  end  worthy  of 
Himself,  His  own  glory.  Now  glory  is  an  honorable  name, 
accompanied  with  praise.  The  material  world  is  evidently 
incapable  of  itself  of  glorifying  God.  It  is  for  man,  a 
reasonable  creature,  to  procure  Him  this  glory  by  con- 
templating and  praising  the  power,  the  wisdom,  the  good- 
ness, in  a  word,  all  the  divine  perfections  which  shine 
forth  in  the  entire  creation.  Again,  this  praise  would,  like 
man  himself,  be  Hmited  if  the  Son  of  God  had  not 
carried  His  love  so  far  as  to  clothe  Himself  with  our 
nature  and  dwell  among  us  (John  i.).  Through  Jesus 
Christ  the  Divinity  received  from  man  perfect  homage 
truly  worthy  of  God.  Thus  through  the  intermediary  of 
man,  who  is,  as  it  were,  an  abridgment  of  the  world,  material 
beings  glorify  their  divine  Author,  and  through  the  organ  of 
the  incarnate  Word  this  glory  is  truly  infinite :  one  act  of 
adoration  of  the  Word  made  flesh  glorifies  the  Creator  much 
more  than  could  milhons  of  worlds  peopled  by  the  most 
subhme  creatures.  Man,  in  return  for  the  praise  which  he 
renders  God,  will  receive  a  hundredfold  of  happiness,  for  the 
glory  of  God  is  intimately  connected  with  the  happiness  of 
His  privileged  creature.  AU  that  is  contained  in  created 
nature,  the  triple  reign  of  the  mineral,  vegetable,  and  animal 
kingdoms,  is  designed  by  Providence  as  a  means  of  helping  us 
to  accomplish  our  present  mission  and  to  attain  our  eternal 
destiny.  It  is  the  same  with  the  events  of  each  day,  whether 
propitious  or  unpropitious,  public  or  private,  ordained  or 
permitted  by  God.  All  miseries,  whether  physical  or  moral, 
the  consequence  of  sin,  have  ceased,  in  virtue  of  the  Re- 
demption, to  be  sterile  or  without  hope;  they  remain  a 
chastisement,  but  it  depends  only  on  man  to  make  them  a 


252  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

means  of  expiation,  a  source  of  merit,  a  claim  to  the  con- 
quest of  the  most  brilhant  crown,  of  a  high  place  in  heaven. 
''  To  them  that  love  God,  all  things  work  together  unto 
good''  (Rom.  viii.  28).  '^The  sufferings  of  this  life  are  not 
worthy  to  be  compared  with  the  glory  to  come  "  (lb.  18). 

THE   MORAL    TEACHING     OF    CHRIST. 

It  is  impossible  to  imagine  anjrthing  more  perfect  than 
the  moral  law  imposed  by  Christ.  Even  the  most  impious 
are  forced  to  acknowledge  this.  After  Strauss,  who  unhesi- 
tatingly affirms  that  'Hhe  moral  teaching  of  Christ  is  the 
foundation  of  human  civilization,"  and  that  'Hhe  Jesus  of 
history  is  a  type  of  moral  perfection,"  Renan  declares  that 
'Hhe  teaching  of  Jesus  is  the  most  beautiful  moral  teach- 
ing which  humanity  has  received.  ..."  ''Each  one  of  us,", 
he  further  says,  ''owes  to  it  all  that  is  best  in  him.  .  .  .  The 
Sermon  on  the  Mount  will  never  be  surpassed."  At  the  same 
time  that  this  law  traces,  with  marvellous  clearness,  all  the 
obhgations  of  man  toward  God,  toward  himself,  toward  the 
family,  and  toward  society,  it  proscribes  not  only  every  crime 
and  every  fault,  but  even  the  desire  and  the  voluntary  thought 
of  evil.  Not  content  with  confirming  the  practice  of  all  that 
is  commanded  by  the  natural  law,  it  invites  us  to  the  practice 
of  the  highest  and  most  perfect  virtues,  of  the  evangelical 
counsels  of  chastity,  poverty,  and  voluntary  obedience,  sub- 
lime virtues  unknown  to  the  world,  of  which  the  name  alone 
must  fill  it  with  amazement. 

The  ideal,  the  model  of  the  pe-rfection  which  Christ  pro- 
poses to  each  one  of  us  is  no  other  than  the  perfection  of 
God  Himself:  "Be  you  therefore  perfect,  as  also  your  heav- 
enly Father  is  perfect"  (Matth.  v.  48). 

To  help  us  to  imitate  this  perfection  the  Son  of  God 
appeared  to  us  under  a  human  form,  thus  offering  us  a  divine 
model  in  Himself.  Hence  we  have  only  to  reproduce  in  our 
souls  the  virtues  which  Christ  has  taught  us  by  example 
and  by  precept:  "For  I  have  given  you  an  example,  that 


DIVINITY   OF   THE    CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  253 

as  I  have  done  to  you,  so  you  do  also"  (John  xiii.  15). 
Every  Christian,  according  to  the  forcible  expression  of  Ter- 
tulHan,  must  be  another  Christ:  Christianus  alter  Christus; 
he  must  be  able  to  say  with  St.  Paul:  ^'I  live,  now  not  I,  but 
Christ  liveth  in  me." 

To  us  who  are  Christians,  brothers  of  Christ,  God  is  in  a 
special  manner  a  Father  full  of  love,  of  goodness,  and  of 
mercy;  hence  it  is  not  astonishing  that  He  requires  His 
children  to  be  specially  distinguished  by  the  practice  of 
these  virtues.  ^^Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  thy 
whole  heart,  and  with  thy  whole  soul,  and  with  thy  whole 
mind;  this  is  the  greatest  and  the  first  commandment.  And 
the  second  is  like  to  this:  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as 
thyself.  On  these  two  commandments  dependeth  the  law 
and  the  prophets. "  (Matth.  xxii.  37-41.)  In  declaring  to 
us  that  He  came  to  enkindle  the  fire  of  His  love,  and  that 
there  is  nothing  that  He  desires  so  much  as  to  see  hearts 
more  and  more  inflamed  with  this  divine  fire,  Jesus  refers 
constantly,  and  in  the  most  persuasive  terms,  to  the  neces- 
sity of  this  compassionate  charity  for  our  neighbor,  that  is, 
for  all  men  without  exception;  for  before  God,  as  St.  Paul 
tells  us,  there  is  neither  bond  nor  free;  there  is  neither  male 
nor  female:  all  are  one  in  Christ  Jesus.  This,  He  tells  us,  is 
His  favorite  commandment,  the  mark  by  which  we  shall 
recognize  His  disciples,  as  well  as  an  infalHble  means  of 
pleasing  Him  and  of  acquiring  innumerable  merits:  ''All 
that  you  do  to  the  least  of  these  My  brethren  I  shall  regard 
as  done  to  Myself." 

Jesus  knows  that  many  of  these  lessons  are  difficult  to  our 
fallen  nature.  Far  from  concealing  this.  He  declares  openly 
that  the  kingdom  of  heaven  suffers  violence,  and  that  he 
who  would  follow  Him  must  renounce  himseK  and  daily 
carry  his  cross.  But  at  the  same  time,  to  stimulate  our 
courage.  He  assures  us  that  His  yoke  is  sweet  and  His  burden 
light  to  those  who  bear  it  generously;  that  the  observance  of 
the  commandments  here  below  is  the  only  true  and  sohd  good, 


254  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

the  only  means  of  procuring  peace  of  soul  (Matth.  xi.  29) ; 
and  He  unceasingly  holds  before  us  the  eternal  and  infinite 
rewards  which  God  has  prepared  for  those  who  love  Him.  And 
as  the  fear  of  punishment  is  needful  to  keep  us  from  the  abyss 
whither  our  passions  constantly  lead  us,  Jesus,  who  desires 
to  save  us  at  any  price,  speaks  fourteen  times  in  appalhng 
terms  of  an  eternal  hell,  and  He  places  before  us  this  un- 
answerable argument:  ''What  shall  it  profit  a  man,  if  he 
gain  the  whole  world,  and  suffer  the  loss  of  his  own  soul?" 
Finally,  to  these  motives,  which  of  themselves  so  powerfully 
persuade  us  to  persevere  in  the  path  of  virtue  and  happiness, 
Jesus  adds  another,  purer,  and  more  worthy  of  great  souls: 
the  love  of  God,  which  enkindles  and  ennobles  all  virtues. 

Moreover,  in  this  painful  warfare  against  the  world,  the 
flesh,  and  the  devil  we  are  not  alone  and  dependent  upon 
our  own  strength.  He  who  unceasingly  watches  over  each 
one  of  His  children  has  prepared  for  them  supernatural, 
most  efficacious,  and  superabundant  means  by  which  they 
may  be  ever  victorious  over  their  enemies ;  the  very  power  of 
God  has  been  placed  at  the  disposition  of  their  weakness. 
Among  the  means  of  obtaining  divine  grace,  prayer  and  the 
sacraments  hold  the  first  place.  Prayer,  a  means  as  honor- 
able as  it  is  easy,  not  only  places  us,  as  often  as  we  will,  in 
intimate  communication  with  "  Our  Father,  who  is  in  heaven," 
but  is,  as  Our  Lord  has  promised,  infalliUy  efficacious.^  As 
to  the  sacraments,  which  are  adapted  to  all  conditions  and 
all  circumstances  of  life,  they  confer  grace  of  themselves  upon 
souls  in  whom  they  meet  no  obstacle.  This  is  particularly 
true  of  the  Sacrament  of  Penance,  which,  by  means  of  sincere 
repentance  and  a  humble  confession  made  under  the  seal  of 
the  most  inviolable  secrecy,  remits  all  sins  whatever  their 
number  and  enormity.^  It  is  still  more  true  of  the  adorable 
Eucharist,  marvellous  invention  of    the  love  of  Him  who, 

^Ward  (Theism),  II.;  A.  C.  Q.  viii.  577,  xi.  491;   C.  W.  xii.  816. 

^  De  Goesbriand,  History  of  Confession;  Melia,  Auricular  Con- 
fession; Wiseman,  Lectures  on  the  Doctrines  of  the  Church;  Hunter, 
TIL,  tr.  19;  D.  R.  New.  Ser.  xxxi.  122, 


DIVINITY   OF   THE   CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  255 

unwilling  to  leave  us  orphans,  found  means  of  returning  to 
His  Father  without  ceasing  to  dwell  among  us.  Under  the 
species  or  appearances  of  bread  and  wine,  Jesus  Himself 
dwells  in  all  tabernacles  as  truly  as  He  was  present  in  the 
manger  and  on  the  cross.  In  this  humble  abode  He  urges 
us  to  come  to  Him  for  strength  and  consolation;  He  un- 
ceasingly renews,  in  an  unbloody  manner,  the  sacrifice  of 
Calvary,  perpetually  offering  Himself  as  victim  to  His 
Father  for  the  sins  of  the  world;  finally,  by  an  admirable 
extension  of  His  Incarnation,  He  deigns  to  unite  Himself 
in  the  most  real  and  intimate  maimer  to  all  who  receive 
Him  in  holy  communion,  clothing  them  with  His  divine 
strength,  and  imparting  even  to  their  bodies  the  germ  of  a 
happy  immortality.^ 

He,  therefore,  who  fails  to  realize  the  end  of  his  creation 
and  of  his  elevation  to  the  supernatural  order  can  attribute 
his  loss  only  to  himself.  He  is  like  a  poor  man  who  volun- 
tarily dies  in  want  and  misery  with  an  inexhaustible  treasure 
at  hand  completely  at  his  disposition. 

THE   TEACJHING    OF   CHRIST   CONCERNING  WORSHIP. 

Christ's  doctrine  of  worship  is  in  perfect  harmony  with  His 
teaching  concerning  God  and  man.^  God  being  spirit  wills 
to  be  adored  in  spirit  and  in  truth;  man  being  also  spirit, 
as  regards  his  soul,  owes  God  a  spiritual  homage,  that  is, 
the  homage  of  his  intelligence  and  his  will:  this  worship, 
then,  must,  above  all  things,  be  interior.  But  as  man  is  also 
matter,  and  his  body  no  less  than  his  soul  is  God's,  creature, 
he  must  add  to  the  interior  homage  of  his  will  the  exterior 
worship  of  his  body.  Finally,  being  a  social  being  and  in- 
debted to  God  for  all  the  advantages  he  derives  from  inter- 
course with  his  fellow  beings,  he  is  boimd  to  honor  God  not 
only  as  an  individual,  but  as  a  social  being;  hence  he  owes 

^  Humphrey,  Sacrifice  and  Sacraments;  Hunter,  1.  c,  tr.  18. 
2  On    Catholic    Worship    see    references    below,    P.    II.;    eh.    2, 
art.  2,  II. 


256  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

God  a  public  worship.  This  triple  homage,  freed  from  all 
the  cruel,  superstitious  practices  of  pagan  worsliip,  as  well  as 
the  minute,  local  details  of  the  worship  prescribed  to  the 
Jews  by  Moses  for  a  special  end,  is  the  most  sublime,  the 
purest,  the  most  worthy  of  God,  as  well  as  the  most  fitting 
for  man.^ 

General  Remarks. — The  following  considerations  will 
manifest  still  more  clearly  the  marvellous  character  of 
Christ's  teaching  concerning  God,  the  world,  man,  morality, 
and  worship. 

1.  We  have  seen  that  the  greatest  unbelievers  themselves 
are  forced  to  recognize  the  intrinsic  perfection  of  Christ's 
moral  teaching  and  its  incomparable  superiority  to  all  the 
philosophic  or  religious  teaching  which  the  world  has  ever 
received.  Minds  never  cease  to  be  impressed  with  its  fulness, 
its  purity,  its  subHmity,  and  its  efficacy.  See  in  Part  II., 
ch.  5,  art.  3.,  Jouffroy's  opinion  of  the  Catechism,  which  is  only 
an  abridgment  of  the  evangelical  truths.  Read  also  on  p.  150 
what  we  have  quoted  from  Rousseau  and  where  he  speaks  in 
truly  admirable  terms  of  the  Gospel.  A  fragment  from  this 
same  author  has  recently  been  found,  in  which  his  admira- 
tion is  still  more  expHcitly  expressed ;  all  it  lacks  is  a  sincere 
acknowledgment  of  Christ's  divinity.  Similar  tributes  or 
acknowledgments  have  come  from  Strauss,  Renan,  and 
others. 

2.  At  the  time  when  Our  Saviour  appeared  polytheism 
was  almost  universal ;  the  grossest  errors,  the  most  ridiculous 
or  the  most  cruel  superstitions  prevailed  everywhere;  the 
grand  ideas  of  one  eternal  God,  of  a  spiritual  soul  endowed 
with  immortality,  of  a  fatherly  and  merciful  providence,  of  a 
life  to  come,  of  the  fall  and  the  restoration  of  man,  almost 
unknown  to  the  masses,  were  frequently,  even  to  the  greatest 
minds,  dark,  and  disheartening  mysteries.  At  the  same 
time,  and  as  a  necessary  consequence,  all  virtues,  even  the 

» Br.  W.  V.  270,  viii.  324. 


DIVINITY  OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  257 

most  indispensable,  were  banished  from  the  world,  and  in 
their  place  reigned  every  vice,  personified  in  the  deities  whom 
men  worshipped.  Such  was  the  condition  of  the  world  when, 
suddenly  and  unexpectedly,  the  evangeUcal  doctrine,  a  doc- 
trine which  has  been  the  admiration  of  all  ages,  appeared  in 
an  obscure  corner  of  Judea.  No  doubt  all  that  is  true  and 
just  in  the  teaching  of  philosophy  is  clearly  and  forcibly  con- 
firmed in  the  teaching  of  Jesus;  but  the  doctrines  of  the 
philosophies  frequently  so  erroneous,  so  varied,  so  opposite, 
so  barren,  are  much  more  frequently  contradicted  than 
approved  in  the  Gospel.  No  doubt  again,  the  Gospel  is  the 
crown  and  perfection  of  the  Mosaic  law.  Moreover,  the 
Jews  so  little  expected  and  were  so  Httle  prepared  for  this 
perfection  that  the  whole  nation  protested  that  they  did 
not  acknowledge  it;  they  did  more,  they  crucified  its 
Author. 

3.  And  this  teaching,  so  wonderful  in  itself,  but  still  more 
wonderful  when  we  consider  the  period  in  which  it  appeared, 
fell  from  the  lips  of  an  obscure  artisan  of  Gahlee,  who  had 
lived  hitherto  by  the  labor  of  His  hands,  ignorant  of  letters 
and  philosophy,  and  who  belonged  to  none  of  the  sects  to 
which  Judea  was  then  a  prey.  These  circumstances  were 
fully  known  to  the  Jews  whom  Jesus  taught.  ''How,"  they 
said,  ''can  this  man  know  letters,  having  never  learned?'' 
(John  vii.  15.) 

4.  Jesus'  manner  of  teaching  was  no  less  remarkable.  He 
does  not  argue  or  discuss  with  His  hearers;  He  does  not 
speak  like  the  Scribes  or  Pharisees,  "  but  as  one  having 
power"  (Matth.  vii.  29).  They  felt  as  they  listened  to 
His  words  that  the  profound  mysteries  which  filled  them 
with  awe  and  wonder  were  familiar  and  simple  matters 
to  Him.  Thus  the  astonished  multitude  exclaim:  "Never 
did  man  speak  hke  this  man."  And  yet  nothing  equals 
the  touching  simplicity  of  this  teaching.  The  language 
of  the  Sage  par  excellence  is  most  natural  and  simple; 
there  is  no   attempt   at   eloquence,  no  extravagant  flights 


258  Christian  apologetics. 

of  fancy,  and  His  words  are  adapted  to  the  simple  intel- 
ligence of  His  hearers,  for  it  is  particularly  to  the  poor  and 
the  humble,  to  simple  upright  souls  that  He  is  pleased  to 
reveal  the  secrets  of  His  wisdom.  His  dogmatic  teaching, 
sublime  in  itself  and  rigidly  exact  in  its  brevity,  is  usually 
expressed  in  the  form  of  sentences  or  proverbs  easily  remem- 
bered; or  in  charming  parables  which  engrave  it  deeply 
upon  the  mind  and  memory;  or  more  frequently  still  in 
admirable  similes  borrowed  from  objects  familiar  to  His 
hearers,  or  from  the  events  of  the  moment,  or  the  customs 
of  daily  life.  Thus  we  behold  the  multitude  hanging  upon 
His  words  and  following  Him  for  days,  insensible  of  the 
claims  of  hunger,  even  into  the  desert.^ 

5.  Jesus  is  no  less  admirable  in  His  intercourse  with  His 
adversaries.  How  frequently  the  Scribes  and  the  Pharisees 
endeavored  to  ensnare  Him  with  artful  questions,  to  make 
Him  contradict  Himself  or  the  Law  of  Moses  and  thus  render 
Him  ridiculous  or  odious  to  the  people!  But  the  clear, 
decisive  answers  of  Jesus  not  only  baffle  their  evil  designs, 
but  put  them  to  such  confusion  that  they  dare  not  question 
Him  further. 

6.  Let  us  recall  what  we  have  said  of  the  marvellous 
efficacy  of  this  teaching  which  has  transformed  the  individual, 
the  family,  and  society.  Despite  the  united  resistance  of 
the  passions,  it  founded  among  men  true  fraternity,  true 
equality,  and  true  liberty;  it  softened  the  morals  of  the  age, 
it  established  the  unity  and  indissolubihty  of  marriage,  and 
with  it  the  stability  of  family  life.  In  a  word,  it  created 
modern  civilization.  While  the  doctrine  of  Plato,  Socrates 
and  others  remained  almost  barren,  the  teaching  of  Jesus 
produced  everywhere  and  in  all  ages  the  most  admirable 
virtues,  marvels  of  abnegation,  of  devotion,  and  of  holiness. 
Even  at  the  present  day  we  find  civihzation  advancing  or 
retrograding  according  as  it  receives  or  rejects  the  teachings 
of  Christianity. 

^  Cardinal  Wiseman  on  the  Parables  of  the  New  Testament. 


divinity  of  the  christian  religion.  259 

First  Objection,  Drawn  from  the  Points  of  Resem- 
blance BETWEEN  Christianity  and  Other  Religions. — ^^\ 
primary  and  more  general  objection  is  stated  now  with  great 
display  of  erudition  in  works  or  public  lectures  treating  of  the 
History  of  Religions.  Under  this  title  the  enemies  of  the 
Church,  with  equal  contempt  or  indifference,  affect  to  con- 
found the  one  true  religion  with  the  multiplied  rehgious 
errors  with  which  men  have  disfigured  the  divine  work. 
This  objection  is  drawn  from  the  points  of  resemblance 
stated  to  exist  between  Christianity  and  the  false  rehgions 
of  antiquity.  They  argue  that  such  resemblance  proves 
that  the  Christian  religion  is  a  simple  evolution  of  earher 
creeds,  and,  Hke  them,  of  human  origin.  Though  the  objec- 
tion is  groundless,  we  consider  it  necessary  to  refute  it  here 
because  of  its  existence  itself  and  of  the  injurious  impressions 
it  has  produced  in  many  souls.  We  are  obliged  to  be  brief, 
but  to  those  who  care  for  a  fuller  development  of  the  subject 
we  would  recommend  the  Abbe  de  Broglie's  Prohlemes  et 
conclusions  de  Vhistoire  des  religions,  a  work  from  which  we 
have  frequently  quoted. 

Reply. — 1st.  It  is  important,  first  of  all,  to  observe  that 
this  objection,  like  all  others  from  other  sources,  leaves 
intact  the  ten  proofs  which  we  have  given  of  the  divinity  of 
Christianity.  When  a  truth  is  solidly  established  by  fitting 
proofs,  no  objection  is  available  against  it.  We  are  far  from 
denying  that  there  are  points  of  resemblance  between  the 
religion  of  Jesus  Christ  and  false  religions;  the  contrary 
would  be  most  astonishing,  nay,  impossible,  as  we  shall  prove. 
But  it  is  no  less  true  that  the  Christian  religion  alone  offers 
convincing  and  numerous  proofs  of  its  divinity.  Thus,  so 
far  from  fearing  the  light,  it  provokes  and  solicits  conscientious 
examination;  it  fears  only  ignorance  and  bad  faith.  The 
false  religions,  on  the  contrary,  in  whatever  form  they  present 
themselves,  Brahminism,  Buddhism,  Zoroastrianism  or  Maz- 
deism,  Confucianism,  etc.,  cannot  endure  for  a  moment  the 
searching  fight  of  reason  and  the  test  of  knowledge.     As 


260  CHKISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

Augustin  Thierry  said:  ''In  point  of  religion,  it  is  only 
Christianity  which  counts."  What  matter  then  the  alleged 
points  of  resemblance  if  it  remains  certain  that  Christianity 
alone  is  divine  and  binding  upon  all  men? 

The  justice  of  our  conclusion  is  strengthened  by  the  fact 
that  among  the  characteristics  of  Christianity  which  clearly 
manifest  its  divinity,  there  are  many  exclusively  its  own 
which  bear  no  analogy  whatever  to  anything  in  pagan 
creeds.  Where,  for  example,  shall  we  find  anything  Hke  the 
numerous  and  exact  prophecies  which  for  so  many  centuries 
prepared  the  coming  of  Jesus  Christ  and  were  so  fully  veri- 
fied in  Him?  Where  shall  we  find  the  innumerable,  striking, 
incontestable  miracles  wrought  by  Jesus,  and  by  His  disciples 
in  His  name?  What  other  religion  presents  such  a  com- 
plete and  perfect  doctrine  concerning  God,  man,  and  the 
relations  existing  between  both?  Where  is  the  founder  of  a 
religion  whose  real  life,  not  a  legendary  life  Uke  Buddha's, 
can  be  compared  to  the  historical  and  absolutely  perfect  Hfe 
of  the  Author  of  Christianity?  These  striking  facts,  insep- 
arable from  the  religion  of  Christ,  clearly  manifest  that  the 
finger  of  God  is  here. 

2d.  We  know  that  God  has  never  left  the  world  without 
supernatural  light ;  that  there  has  been  a  revelation  from  the 
beginning.  The  successive  communications  of  God  with 
mankind,  the  memory  of  which  must  have  been  perpetuated 
through  the  ages,  even  among  pagan  nations,  suffice  to  ex- 
plain many  analogies :  all  religions  have  necessarily  borrowed, 
more  or  less,  from  that  common  source. 

3d.  So  far  from  its  being  difficult  to  explain  the  points  of 
resemblance  between  Christianity  and  the  religions  of  the 
East,  particularly  Buddliism,  it  can  easily  be  shown  that  this 
resemblance  must  necessarily  exist  to  a  certain  degree. 
Human  nature,  everywhere  the  same,  is  essentially  rehgious; 
in  fact  man  has  been  defined  as  a  religious  animal.  Rehgion 
is  destined  to  satisfy  this  instinctive  aspiration  of  the  human 
heart;  therefore  the  different  creeds,  whatever  their  origin, 


DIVINITY   OF   THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  261 

divine  or  human,  must  have  many  points  of  resemblance. 
Let  us  explain  our  idea  by  a  comparison.  Royal  palaces 
of  capital  cities  are  for  the  most  part  similarly  arranged  or 
constructed.  In  each  one  we  find  a  throne-room,  reception- 
rooms,  private  apartments  for  the  sovereign,  others  for  his 
family  and  his  suite ;  in  all  of  them  we  find  stairways,  ante- 
chambers, doors,  and  windows.  Can  we  conclude  from  this 
that  these  palaces  were  all  built  by  the  same  architect  and 
on  the  same  plan?  By  no  means.  These  resemblances  come 
from  the  fact  that  the  structures  are  intended  for  one  and 
the  same  purpose :  to  serve  as  a  dwelling  for  the  head  of  the 
state.  For  a  similar  reason  one  railway  station  resembles 
another,  one  theatre  another.  It  is  the  same  with  social 
institutions:  in  all  countries  dehberative  bodies,  tribunals, 
armies  have  certain  points  of  resemblance,  for  the  reason  that 
they  tend  to  the  same  end  and  respond  to  the  same  needs. 

To  apply  these  comparisons  we  have  only  to  bear  in  mind 
that  false  rehgions  as  well  as  the  true,  which  alone  is  endowed 
with  heavenly  virtue,  are  intended  to  satisfy  the  religious 
aspirations  of  the  human  heart.  Among  pagans,  as  well  as 
among  Christians,  we  find  the  need  of  adoration  and  of 
prayer,  of  expiation  and  of  sacrifice,  terrors  of  conscience, 
a  tendency  toward  the  supernatural,  fear  of  invisible  beings, 
aspirations  toward  a  future  life.  Now,  as  all  religions  are 
intended  to  respond  to  these  aspirations  of  the  human  soul, 
they  must  necessarily  contain  many  points  of  resemblance. 

Let  us  suppose  men  deprived  of  the  benefit  of  revelation 
and  a  divine  religion,  what  happens?  They  naturally  seek 
what  they  lack,  and  fashion  it  according  to  their  own  ideas. 
Feeling  the  need  of  a  revelation,  they  are  naturally  disposed 
to  listen  to  any  prophet  without  even  verifying  his  claims; 
feeling  the  need  of  a  redeemer,  they  give  credence  to  him  who 
declares  that  he  can  and  will  save  them;  eager  for  religious 
emotions,  they  institute  rites,  ceremonies,  feasts,  canticles, 
calculated  to  awaken  and  nourish  these  emotions;  with 
aspirations  toward  the  supernatural,  they  address  themselves 


262  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

to  invisible  beings  to  obtain  for  them  health  and  earthly 
blessings.  This  explains  the  existence  in  all  ages  of  prophets, 
messiahs,  thaumaturges,  founders  of  creeds,  inventors  of 
touching  ceremonies. 

If  such,  in  brief,  is  the  history  of  the  formation  of  human 
religions,  is  it  not  evident  that  the  divine  religion,  though 
very  different  in  essential  points,  must  resemble  the  others 
in  man}^  respects?  Consider  the  subject  more  in  detail  and 
you  will  better  understand  the  reason  of  these  analogies. 

The  dogmas  taught  by  Christianity  are,  in  part  at  least, 
truths  which  reason  of  itself  can  attain.  If  revelation  has 
added  to  the  treasure  of  natural  truths,  it  has  first  enlarged 
and  perfected  the  knowledge  of  these  truths  of  the  natural 
order;  it  has  made  them  more  accessible  to  the  mass  of 
mankind,  and  imparted  to  them  a  clearness  and  certainty 
which  the  unaided  reason  too  frequently  is  powerless  to 
give.  Is  it  astonishing  to  find  in  the  teaching  of  reason 
certain  dogmas  which  recall  points  of  evangelical  doctrine? 

It  must  needs  be  the  same  with  Christian  morahty,  since, 
at  bottom,  it  is  only  the  natural  law  developed  and  super- 
naturalized,  illumined  with  a  new  light,  and  enlarged  with 
the  addition  of  certain  prescriptions  imposed  by  God. 
Why,  therefore,  should  we  not  find  in  false  religions  certain 
moral  precepts  analogous  to  those  of  the  true  religion? 

The  man  who  feels  in  himself  appetites  condemned  by  con- 
science, readily  understands  that  to  secure  the  triumph  of 
the  spirit  over  the  flesh  he  must  wage  war  against  the  pleasures 
of  the  body,  accustom  this  body  to  suffer.  He  sees  also  in 
this  suffering  a  means  of  appeasing  the  Divinity,  which  his 
guilty  weakness  has  offended.  Then  there  follows  naturally 
a  moral  tendency  to  mortification  of  the  passions,  to  fasting, 
to  voluntar>%  self-inflicted,  bodily  suffering.  We  must  find, 
then,  in  the  purer  rehgions  a  tendency  to  lead  a  fife  of  austerity 
fitted  to  conquer  the  evil  inchnations  of  nature,  and  to 
employ  for  this  end  the  means  indicated  by  nature.  Why 
should  not  the  Buddhist  monks,  for  example,  in  order  to 


DIVINITY   OF   THE    CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  263 

become  more  perfect,  employ  means  analogous  to  those  in 
use  among  the  ascetics  and  religious  of  Catholicism? 

As  to  exterior  worship,  which  is  only  the  outward  ex- 
pression of  the  hidden  sentiments  of  the  soul  in  regard  to  the 
divinity,  it  is  quite  natural  that  it  should  bear  great  analogy 
among  the  different  rehgions.  Man's  object  in  this  worship  is 
to  express  to  God  his  respect,  his  adoration,  his  submission, 
his  gratitude,  and  obtain  from  Him  blessings  and  the  pardon 
of  his  offences.  What  will  he  do,  then,  but  have  recourse  in 
his  worship  to  the  means  which  his  reason,  his  imagination, 
his  sentiments,  and  the  nature  which  surrounds  Mm  suggest 
and  afford?  Why  should  not  the  true  rehgion  employ  the 
same  means?  Why,  for  example,  should  the  Christian 
religion  have  abstained  from  the  use  of  incense,  from  the 
burning  wax,  from  religious  canticles,  from  music,  from 
genuflections,  from  prostrations,  from  sacrifice — in  a  word, 
from  all  that  is  fitted  to  express  the  acknowledgment  of 
God's  sovereign  dominion  over  His  creatures,  to  implore  His 
help  or  His  pardon,  to  maintain  the  fervor  of  religious 
sentiments  in  the  human  heart?  Is  not  this  restoring  crea- 
tures to  their  true  and  highest  destiny,  and  re-establishing 
the  rights  of  God? 

The  justice  of  tills  conclusion  is  more  evident  when  we 
consider  that  God,  in  prescribing  by  means  of  revelation  an 
exterior  worship,  must,  in  His  msdom  and  goodness,  make 
it  in  harmony  with  the  tendencies  and  the  necessities  of  the 
nature  with  which  He  has  endowed  us.  Nay,  it  was  part  of 
His  wisdom  and  goodness  to  take  into  account  what  man 
had  found  of  himself,  what  made  the  deepest  and  most  lasting 
impression  upon  him,  and  even,  in  a  certain  measure,  religious 
customs  hallowed  by  time,  and  thus  facilitate  the  accom- 
plishment of  the  duties  He  prescribed.  In  prescribing  to 
Moses  the  rites,  the  ceremonies,  and  the  feasts  of  the  law 
without  obliging  the  Hebrews  to  renounce  completely  their 
rehgious  customs,  God  acted  as  a  tender  and  provident 
Father.    In  her  turn,  the  Catholic  Church,  charged  by  her 


264  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

divine  Founder  to  determine  the  religious  practices  other 
than  the  sacraments,  and  to  regulate  the  details  of  worship, 
was  not  obliged  to  set  aside  the  lawful  custom  of  converts 
that  came  to  her  either  from  Judaism  or  paganism.  Heir 
of  the  Old  Law,  it  was  just  that  she  should  borrow  a  part  of 
its  rites  and  ceremonies.  As  to  customs,  good  or  indifferent 
in  themselves,  of  human  religions,  would  she  not  have  pre- 
served them,  only  purifying  and  sanctifying  them  by  re- 
ferring thenceforth  to  the  Creator  what  had  served  in  the 
worship  of  creatures?  Why  should  she  have  suppressed  all 
pagan  festivals?  Was  it  not  sufficient  to  replace  them 
with  Christian  feasts  bearing  exterior  analogies  to  the  first? 
It  was  evidently  easier  in  this  way  to  abofish  idolatrous  or 
corrupt  customs. 

4th.  I^et  us  call  attention  here  to  a  marvel  suggested  by 
what  we  have  said  of  the  teaching  of  Jesus.  This  doctrine, 
this  moral  teaching,  this  worship  so  absolutely  perfect, 
answering  so  perfectly  all  the  postulates  of  reason  and  satis- 
fying so  completely  all  the  aspirations  of  the  human  heart — 
in  a  word,  this  teaching  which  nothing  presaged  or  foretold, 
— how,  without  divine  intervention,  could  it  suddenly  have 
fallen  from  the  lips  of  an  obscure  artisan  of  GaHlee,  who  had 
fived  by  the  labor  of  his  hands,  knowing  nothing  of  the 
disputes  of  the  schools  and  sects  into  which  Judea  was 
divided?  How  was  this  man  capable  of  the  arduous  study 
necessary  to  master  the  eclecticism  alleged  to  be  the  origin  of 
Christianity?  He  was  a  workman  and  the  reputed  son  of  a 
workman ;  all  his  youth  had  been  spent  in  Judea,  in  the  midst 
of  his  own  people,  and  he  died  at  a  comparatively  immature 
age.  When,  then,  could  he  have  travelled  throughout  the 
entire  East  to  study  its  diverse  and  contrary  doctrines? 
How  could  he  have  read  the  books  of  India,  Persia,  and 
China,  of  which  no  translation  existed  in  his  own  tongue? 
And  how  could  he  have  made  a  choice  so  absolutely  perfect 
among  so  many  conflicting  doctrines  replete  with  errors? 
Nor  had  he,  it  is  certain,  any  knowledge  of  contemporaneous 


DIVINITY  OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  265 

philosophy.  We  have  the  testimony  of  Renan  in  this 
respect.  ''Jesus  Christ,"  he  says,  ''had  no  knowledge  of 
Greek  culture,  either  directly  or  indirectly,  .  .  .  nor  was  He 
any  more  conversant  with  the  extravagant  scholasticism 
which  was  taught  at  Jerusalem." 

Conclusion. — We  have  said  sufficient  to  show  the  inanity 
of  this  objection,  alleged  to  be  overwhelming,  against  the  true 
religion.  If  Christianity  has  necessarily  certain  points  of 
resemblance  to  other  religions,  it  differs  from  each  of  them 
in  a  multitude  of  wholly  essential  points.  No  doubt  it 
contains  all  that  is  good  and  holy  to  be  found  elsewhere, 
but  without  any  admixture  of  error  or  imperfection.  It 
alone,  moreover,  presents  among  the  various  elements  of 
which  it  is  composed  a  perfect  harmony;  it  alone  satisfies 
everywhere  the  religious  instincts  of  the  human  heart; 
it  alone  remains  perpetually  young  and  promises  to  endure 
to  the  end  of  mankind.  The  exterior  resemblances  which 
exist  between  the  divine  religion  and  works  of  human  origin 
do  not  destroy,  then,  the  originality  of  the  divine  work;  they 
only  prove  how  perfectly  this  work  is  adapted  to  all  the 
needs  of  the  human  soul.  In  short,  while  the  false  religions 
present  no  certain  character  of  a  divine  word  addressed  to 
mankind,  and  while  they  contain  maxims  and  precepts 
contrary  to  truth  and  probity,  Christianity  alone  offers  us, 
together  with  the  purest  and  most  elevating  moral  teaching, 
the  most  evident  proofs  of  a  truly  divine  work.^ 

Second  Objection,  Drawn  from  a  Comparison  of  Chris- 
tianity AND  Buddhism. — Certain  rationahsts  of  the  present 
day  have  thought  to  depreciate  Christianity  and  rob  it  of  its 
dogmatic  and  moral  pre-eminence  by  contrasting  it  especially 
with  Buddhism. 

We  are  loath  to  treat  of  a  form  of  religion  so  unworthy 
the  attention  of  a  serious  mind;  but  the  present  circum- 
stances oblige  us  to  say  a  word  sufficient  to  warn  those 
who  might  be  deceived  by  a  false  appearance  of  learning 

^Lacordaire,  Conf.  2,  on  God  and  Man. 


266  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

and    statements    as    audacious    as    they    are     devoid    of 
truth.  ^ 

^  In  order  to  prove  that  Christianity  is  only  a  copy  of  the  doctrines 
of  ancient  India,  Jacolliot,  an  ex-magistrate  of  French  India,  has 
written  several  books,  the  principal  of  which  bear  the  titles  La  Bible 
dans  rinde  and  La  vie  de  Jezeus-Christna.  If  we  mention  these  works, 
it  is  certainly  not  because  of  their  scientific  value,  for  they  have  none, 
but  because  the  inconceivable  audacity  of  the  author's  lying  state- 
nients  is  calculated  to  impose  on  the  good  faith  of  many  readers. 
When  you  read  the  crushing  refutation  of  Mgr.  Harlez  you  can  under- 
stand what  must  have  been  the  feeling  of  this  learned  Orientalist 
when  he  confronted  JacoUiot's  quotations  with  the  original  texts. 
"A  most  painful  task,"  he  says,  "is  that  of  the  critic  obliged  to  review 
a  book  where  ignorance  and  bad  faith  meet  him  at  every  step :  he  has 
to  force  himself  to  read  to  the  end;  there  are  moments  when  the  pen 
falls  from  his  hand.  .  .  .  This  book,  written  by  a  man  with  no  knowl- 
edge of  science,  is  a  mere  tissue  of  lying  statements,  anti-scientific 
hypotheses,  and  errors  unpardonable  in  a  student  of  the  lowest  class. 
It  is  permeated  with  a  dishonest  spirit  and  inconceivable  disingenous- 
ness.  Jacolliot  indulges  chiefly  in  two  styles  of  argument:  one  is 
to  substitute  for  history  the  most  improbable  hypotheses,  the  other 
is  to  affirm,  with  the  most  imperturbable  assurance,  falsifications, 
contradictions  the  most  evident,  the  most  inexcusable,  the  most 
unworthy  of  a  man  with  any  self-respect;  he  even  goes  so  far  as  to 
invent,  completely,  long  texts,  attributing  them  to  authors  who  never 
wrote  a  line."  See  proofs  of  this  appreciation  in  Mgr.  Harlez'  La 
Bible  dans  VInde.  This  judgment,  given  by  a  learned  Catholic,  is 
confirmed  by  other  equally  competent  scholars  unbiassed  by  any 
religious  ideas.  Let  us  cite,  for  example,  Julien  Vinson,  an  author 
who  belongs  to  the  militant  materialist  school,  and  well  known 
by  his  labors  in  the  Indian  tongues  called  Dravidian.  "I  could  have 
mentioned,"  he  says,  "in  the  preceding  enumeration  publications 
bearing  the  name  of  Jacolliot,  an  ex-magistrate  of  French  India, 
but  I  am  speaking  only  of  serious,  genuine,  or  at  least  conscientious 
works "  {Revue  de  linguistique,  t.  XIII,  15  Janvier  1880,  pp.  56 
and  57).  The  celebrated  Indianist,  Angelo  de  Gubernatis,  of  the 
mythic  school  of  Strauss,  does  not  deign  to  accord  him  any  more 
notice  than  the  following:  "Such  is  the  case,  Signor  Jacolliot,  credu- 
lous dreamer  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding".  (Ch.  II.,  p.  265). 

The  manner  in  which  writers  have  branded  Mr.  Jacolliot  makes  us 
readily  divine  that  his  Jezeus-Christna  is  a  creation  of  the  author's 
inventive  genius.    Never  in  ancient  India  did  there  exist  either  a 


DIVINITY   OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  267 

Let  us  hasten  to  say  that  all  rationahsts  are  by  no  means 
so  deplorably  blind.  There  are  those,  on  the  contrary,  who 
publicly  proclaim  Christianity  to  be  superior  to  Buddhism. 
To  quote  a  few  significant  witnesses:  Kuenen  declares 
that  Christianity  is  as  superior  to  Buddhism  as  Hfe  is  to  death, 
as  heaven  with  its  beatific  vision  is  to  Nirvana,  as  a  living 
body  is  to  a  phantom.  Reveille,  in  his  lecture  at  the 
College  of  France,  expressed  himself  in  almost  the  same 
terms.  J.  J.  Ampere,  after  enumerating  the  greater  number 
of  analogies  upon  which  certain  writers  insist,  does  not  hesi- 
tate to  state  publicly  that ''between  the  two  rehgions,  that 
of  Christ  and  that  of  Buddha,  there  is  a  profound  and  radical 
difference:  the  difference  between  theism  and  pantheism." 
Ad.  Franck,  in  his  studies  of  the  laws  of  Oriental  nations, 
cannot  help  showing  that  the  virtues  taught  by  Buddhism  are 
sterile  for  want  of  a  sohd  basis,  of  a  true  imderstanding  of 
man's  relations  with  nature  and  with  God. 

Again,  Barthelemy  Saint-Hilaire,  who  studied  Buddhism 
for  thirty  years.  ''Reared  in  the  bosom  of  an  admirable 
philosophy  and  reUgion,  we  take  httle  pains,"  he  says,  "to 
learn  their  value  and  the  immense  services  they  render  us. 
We  enjoy  them,  while  we  are  completely  indifferent  and  even 
ungrateful  to  them.  The  marvels  of  ci\ilization  multiply 
about  us.  We  profit  by  them,  but  we  rarely  ask  to  what 
our  races  owe  their  great  welfare,  their  stability,  their  com- 
parative enlightenment,  while  at  our  door  are  other  races 

Jezeus  or  a  Christna,  still  less  a  Jezeus-Christna;  the  very  name  is 
impossible  in  Sanscrit.  But  it  had  to  be  proved  that  it  was  the  Vedas, 
the  sacred  books  of  India,  which  gave  the  idea  of  the  Christ  of  the 
Gospel.  We  find,  it  is  true,  but  in  books  posterior  to  the  Vedas,  a 
certain  Krishna  (a  word  which  signifies  black),  who  bears  no  resem- 
blance to  our  divine  Saviour.  It  is  only  in  the  Puranas,  books  written 
in  the  middle  of  the  Middle  Ages,  that  they  inserted  in  the  legend  of 
this  personage  traits  bearing  a  certain  analogy  to  facts  of  the  Gospel. 
We  know  that  Christianity  was  brought  at  an  early  age  to  India,  and 
that  the  Christian  colonies  continued  in  existence  there  until  the 
arrival  of  the  Portuguese.    See  La  Bible  dans  I'Inde,  by  Mgr.  de  Harlez. 


268  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

who  are  still  in  a  semi-barbarous  state  and  who  have  never, 
since  the  beginning  of  time,  been  able  to  form  either  societies 
or  governments  that  would  be  bearable  to  us.  I  think  that 
the  study  of  Buddhism,  even  in  its  most  general  characteristics, 
will  help  us  to  solve  this  enigma.  We  shall  see  why  a  religion 
which  to-day  counts  more  adherents  than  any  other,  has  done 
so  little  for  the  happiness  of  mankind,  and  we  shall  find  the 
explanation  of  its  impotence  in  the  strange  and  deplorable 
doctrines  which  it  has  professed. '^  Farther  on  he  adds: 
^'Despite  appearances,  sometimes  very  specious,  Buddhism 
is  simply  one  long  series  of  contradictions;  it  is  not  calumni- 
ating it  to  say  that  it  is  a  spirituahty  without  a  soul,  virtue 
without  duty,  morahty  without  freedom,  a  world  without 
God.  What  can  we  derive  from  such  teachings?  What 
things  one  must  forget  to  become  the  bhnd  disciples  of 
Buddhism!  How  low  one  must  descend  in  the  scale  of 
nations  and  of  civilizations!  The  only  but  immense  service 
which  Buddhism  can  render  us  is  to  make  us,  by  means  of 
the  sad  contrast  it  offers,  better  appreciate  the  inestimable 
value  of  our  beliefs  by  showing  us  what  it  has  cost  a  portion 
of  mankind  to  be  without  them.'' 

This  testimony  from  writers  not  of  the  faith  may  suffice 
for  the  irrevocable  condemnation  of  Buddhism.  Present 
circumstances,  however,  constrain  us  to  offer  a  few  reflections 
on  the  dogmatic  and  moral  teaching  of  Buddhism.  We 
shall  speak  first  of  primitive,  theoretical  Buddhism,  then  of 
Buddhism  as  it  is  popularly  known  and  practised. 

Historical  Details.  —  The  founder  of  Buddhism  was 
Sakya-Mimi  (the  sage,  the  ascetic  of  Sakya),  better  known 
under  the  name  of  Buddha.^  We  know  his  life  only  through 
biographies  which  appeared  several  centuries  after  his  exist- 
ence.     The  Buddhists  themselves  do  not  agree  as  to  the 

*  Buddha  is  only  a  qualifying  term  meaning  one  who  has  attained 
to  true  knowledge  and  moral  perfection  by  his  own  efforts.  Sakya- 
Muni  is  the  Buddha  illumined  by  excellence,  a  mere  man,  but  in- 
finitely superior  to  ordinary  men. 


DIVINITY   OF   THE    CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  269 

period  in  which  he  hved.  Max  Miiller  gives  the  date  of  his 
death  as  477  before  Christ;  other  Indianists  vary  between 
343  and  370.^ 

As  to  the  legends,  of  no  historic  value  whatever,  which 
embelHsh  the  history  of  Buddha,  they  were  probably  created, 
part  of  them  at  least,  five  or  six  centuries  after  his  death, 
a  period  when  the  Gospel  had  already  spread  into  India. 
This  would  readily  explain  certain  traits  in  the  legend  which 
bear  a  strange  resemblance  to  facts  related  in  the  Gospel. 
The  legend  itself,  however,  is  by  no  means  the  same  in  all  the 
Buddhist  schools.^ 

The  doctrine  of  the  founder  of  Buddhism  was  written,  not 
by  him,  but  by  his  disciples,  and  the  canon  of  the  books 
which  contain  it  was  drawn  up  only  88  years  before  Christ. 
Buddhism,  which  is  nothing  more  than  a  sort  of  rebellion  of 
the  individual  reason  against  the  old  Brahmin  despotism, 
and  notably  against  the  anti-fraternal  and  anti-social  dogma 
of  caste,  spread  over  the  vast  plateaux  of  upper  Asia  and 
invaded  China  and  Japan.  It  prevails  also  in  Thibet,  Bur- 
mah,  Siam,  Ceylon,  etc. 

Let  it  not  be  supposed,  moreover,  that  Buddhism  is  every- 
where one  and  the  same.     It  is  true,  it  is  customary  to 

^  What  would  unbelievers  say  if  there  were  similar  uncertainty  in 
regard  to  the  authenticity  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures  and  the  hero 
of  the  Gospel?  According  to  Senart,  all  that  can  be  stated  with 
certainty  in  regard  to  Buddha  is  reduced  to  two  points :  1st.  Buddhism 
had  a  founder;  2d.  This  founder  was  an  anchorite,  an  ascetic,  whom 
the  teaching  of  Brahminism  could  not  satisfy.  "Have  we  not  met  with 
Orientalists  who  maintain  that  Sakya-Muni,  the  Buddha,  was  probably 
only  a  solar  myth?  And  if  they  were  to  succeed  some  day  in  prov- 
ing this  contention,  what  would  become  of  the  resemblance  which 
they  have  so  often  sought  to  establish  between  Jesus  and  Buddha  ?  " 
Picard.  266. 

2  P.  Bonniot,  in  his  Le  Miracle  et  ses  contrefagons,  gives  a  few  of 
the  marvels  attributed  to  Buddha:  it  would  be  difficult  to  conceive 
of  anything  more  absurd,  more  incoherent,  and  more  grotesque.  A 
biography  of  Buddha  is  to  be  found  in  Mgr.  Harlez'  Manuel  du  Baud/- 


270  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

estimate  the  disciples  of  Buddha  as  350,000,000.  There 
are  those,  Rhys-David  for  example,  who  say  500,000,000; 
but  these  are  not  all  real  Buddhists  by  any  means.  This 
number  includes  more  than  400,000,000  Chinese.  Now, 
though  the  Chinese  include  Buddha  at  times  among  the 
objects  of  their  worship,  they  care  little  for  his  doctrine,  and 
in  no  wise  do  they  call  themselves  Buddhists. 

It  is  an  undisputed  fact,  moreover,  that  Buddhism  is 
divided  into  two  piincipal  branches  which  have  taken  directly 
opposite  characters.  The  Buddhism  of  the  North  has  been 
moulded,  more  or  less,  by  the  ideas  of  the  people  among 
whom  it  was  introduced — ^in  fact  it  has  become  idolatry.  In 
China  it  consists  in  ranking  Buddha  and  the  personages  of 
the  Buddliist  Olympus  among  the  spirits  from  whom  favors 
are  petitioned  and  in  making  gifts  to  the  bonzes.  In 
reality  it  is  no  longer  Buddhism.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
South  (Ceylon  and  the  East  Indies)  has  remained  generally 
faithful  to  the  system  of  the  founder:  the  disciples  still 
seek  to  attain  Nirvana  by  the  practice  of  renunciation 
and  penance,  and  the  Buddhist  monasteries  offer  examples 
of  genuine  virtue,  admirable  discipline,  and  profoimd  faith 
in  their  doctrines. 

dhism,  tVaprh  le  catechisme  du  Suhhddra  bhikshou  et  la  Vajratcchedika. 
This  catechism  is  the  work  of  a  monk  and  doctor  of  Buddhism  who 
wished  to  give  his  coreligionists  and  Europeans  an  exact  and  perfect 
knowledge  of  the  doctrine  they  were  invited  to  practise  and  propa- 
gate.    The  learned  professor  of  Louvain  has  merely  translated  it. 

The  zealous  Buddhist  is  careful  to  pass  over  in  silence  certain  traits 
not  altogether  creditable  to  his  hero.  He  does  not  mention,  for 
example,  that  he  died  of  a  fit  of  indigestion  with  which  gluttony 
had  something  to  do.  He  is  equally  reticent  in  regard  to  a  multitude 
of  marvellous  events  which  make  Buddha  out  to  be  the  most  super- 
natural being  that  ever  existed.  The  reason  of  this  reticence  is  that 
Buddhism  absolutely  rejects  miracles:  everything  is  done  according  to 
the  universal  laws  of  nature  which  bind  all  beings,  whatever  their 
perfection  or  their  elevation.  Here  again  we  are  confronted  with 
one  of  the  contradictions  with  which  this  strange  religion  abounds. 


DIVINITY    OF   THE    CHRISTIAN   RELIGION.  271 

1.  Theoretical  Buddhism. — Sakya-Muni's  end  or  object 
was  exclusively  moral:  he  cared  little  for  the  solution  of 
questions  relating  to  the  origin  of  man,  to  the  nature  of 
God  and  of  other  beings ;  he  gave  his  attention  almost  en- 
tirely to  moral  precepts.  His  sole  end  was  to  procure  for 
himself  and  for  others  deliverance  from  temporal  evils,  and 
above  all  to  escape  the  necessity  of  being  born  again,  for  all 
life,  he  believed,  was  fatally  miserable.  AVe  see  at  once  that 
Buddhism  does  not  merit  the  name  of  religion,  and  that  it 
responds  in  no  way  to  the  postulates  of  reason  and  of  the 
human  heart.  Moreover,  its  dogmatic  character,  upon 
which  morahty  is  necessarily  based,  abounds  in  errors  and 
contradictions.  We  need  only  point  out  a  few  of  these  and 
we  have  a  superabundant  refutation  of  the  whole  system. 

A.  Dogmatic  Character.^ —  The  doctrine  of  Buddha 
includes : 

^  For  a  fuller  knowledge  of  the  metaphysical  speculations  which  form 
the  basis  of  Buddhist  morahty  see  the  work  of  Mgr.  Harlez  already 
quoted.  This  dogmatic  teaching  is  borrowed  from  Vajratcchedika 
(The  Cleaver  of  the  Diamond),  the  most  famous  of  all  the  books, 
written  by  one  of  the  most  fervent  and  best  instructed  adepts  of 
Buddhism.  In  reading  this  faithful  summary  of  the  doctrine  of 
Buddha  one  asks  one's  self  whether  the  author  of  such  a  doctrine  was 
in  his  right  mind  or  whether  he  spoke  seriously.  Here  are  a  few  of 
the  chief  features  of  these  fundamental  lessons.  The  rest  are  exactly 
like  these  specimens. 

1.  There  is  no  law  nor  doctrine  revealed  by  Buddha,  for  the  reason 
that  this  doctrine  is  incomprehensible,  has  no  exterior  sign  to  distin- 
guish it;  it  is  neither  doctrine  nor  non-doctrine. 

2.  If  a  virtuous  man  or  woman  were  to  fill  the  world  with  seven 
precious  jewels  and  gave  them  to  illuminated  Buddhas,  their  merits 
would  be  immense,  incommensurable.  And  why?  Because  this 
mass  of  merits  has  been  declared  a  non-mass  by  Buddha,  and  that  is 
why  Buddha  has  said  it  is  a  mass,  a  true  mass  of  merits. 

3.  If  there  were  found  a  man  as  large  as  Himalaya,  his  individuality 
would  no  doubt  be  very  great.  And  why?  Because  what  is  called 
individuality  is  declared  by  Buddha  a  non-individuality,  and  that  is 
why  it  is  called  individuality.     It  is  a  man  with  an  extraordinarily 


272  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

1st.  Pantheism,  or  rather  Positivism  and  Atheism.  In 
reality  Buddhism  does  not  formally  deny  or  affirm  the  exist- 
ence of  a  supreme  being.  On  this  capital  point  Buddha  and 
his  disciples,  at  least,  refrain  from  pronouncing  judgment. 
Therefore  the  system  is  justly  called  atheistic.  Yet,  strange 
as  it  may  seem,  prayer  and  adoration  are  prescribed.  An 
attentive  study  of  peojies  reput^  ta  be  Buddhists  shows 
that  they  have  divinities  to  whom' they  offer  adoration:  in 
one  place  it  is  the  serpent  or  the  dragon,  in  another  and 
almost  everywhere  it  is  tlie  devil;  in  the  kingdoms  of  the  ex- 
treme East  the  worship  ^of  the  spirits  of  ancestors  seems  to 
predominate;  elsewhere,  again,  it  is  Sabya-Muni  who  has 
become  the  god  of  his  disciples.  Moreover,  this  diversity 
was  inevitable :  when  the  Buddhist  teachers  systematically 
refused  to  pronounce  upon  the  existence  and  the  nature  of 
God  they  left  their  adherents  free  to  form  whatever  idea  they 
would  of  Him,  and  to  choose  their  god  or  gods  according  as 
it  suited  them.^ 

large  body.     For  he  is  declared  by  Buddha  to  have  no  body,  and  that 
is  why  it  can  be  said  that  he  has  a  large  body. 

4.  The  dust  of  the  whole  world  is  no  doubt  an  immense  mass.  And 
why?  Because  this  dust  has  been  declared  non-dust  by  Buddha, 
and  that  is  why  it  is  called  dust.  And  this  world  has  been  declared  a 
non-world;  that  is  why  it  is  called  a  world. 

5.  It  is  said  that  Buddha  should  be  recognized  by  exterior  marks. 
Not  at  all.  For  these  marks  have  been  declared  non-marks  by 
Buddha,  and  for  this  reason  they  are  called  marks. 

6.  There  is  no  doctrine  which  may  have  been  learned  by  Buddha 
in  a  perfect  illumination.  All  doctrine  taught  by  Buddha  is  neither 
truth  nor  error.  Because  all  doctrines  are  non-doctrines,  declared 
such  by  Buddha.  That  is  why  it  is  said:  All  these  doctrines  are 
the  doctrines  of  Buddha. 

7.  In  the  last  age  there  will  be  beings  who  will  believe  in  these 
doctrines,  and  these  beings  will  not  be  beings  or  non-beings.  For 
these  beings  have  been  declared  non-beings  by  Buddha,  and  that  is 
why  they  are  called  beings. 

^  For  the  Buddhist  there  is  no  personal  God,  no  creation.  As  to 
the  manner  in  which  the  world  was  produced  Buddha  gives  no  opinion, 
for  the  reason  that  he  judged  that  this  knowledge  was  of  no  value  for 


DIVINITY  OP   THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  273 

2d.  Metempsychosis,  or  the  rebirth  of  souls  in  other  bodies. 
A  fatal  law,  inherent  in  tilings,  connects  suffering  with  wrong- 
doing, and  happiness  with  good  deeds.  Men  live  to  expiate 
their  evil  deeds:  those  who  have  led  a  good  life  are  born 
again  to  a  new  life  in  happier  conditions,  and  go  thus  from 
transmigration  to  transmigration  until  they  reach  the  final 
term,  Nirvana. 

3d.  What  is  Nirvana  ?  There  is  nothing  more  obscure  in 
the  doctrine  of  Buddhism.  The  most  probable  opinion  is 
that  which  makes  Nirvana  the  absolute  suppression  of  ex- 
istence. Various  Buddhist  books  give  the  following  defini- 
tion: ''Nirvana  cannot  be  a  place  of  sensible  fehcity,  or 
intellectual  happiness,  or  incorporeality,  or  consciousness,  or 
unconsciousness  of  self."  What  then  can  it  be,  if  not  the 
negation  of  existence — nothingness?  Moreover,  the  com- 
parisons employed  to  explain  it  certainly  convey  an  analogous 
idea ;  for  example,  it  is  said  to  be  the  absorption  of  the  creature 
in  the  Great  Being,  the  universal  Being — an  unconscious  and 
motionless  mass;  again,  it  is  a  state  of  passive  and  negative 
repose,  void  of  all  thought  and  all  sentiment;  in  a  word, 
it  is  at  least  the  equivalent  of  annihilation. 

4th.  The  principle  upon  which  Buddhism  bases  this 
metempsychosis  and  this  strange  beatitude  is  pessimism. 
To  the  Buddhist,  life  is  an  evil,  and  true  happiness  consists 
in  being  delivered  from  it;  by  the  practice  of  virtue  he  escapes 
after  death  the  law  which  would  obhge  him  to  be  born  again 
to  expiate  his  faults.  He  who  is  without  stain  will  be  bom 
no  more. 

Appreciation. — All  that  can  be  said  of  atheism,  positivism, 
metempsychosis,  nihilism,  applies  equally  to  Buddhist  dogma. 

the  end  he  had  in  view,  i.e.,  deliverance  from  the  evils  of  life,  or  rather 
from  life  itself — for  the  complete  annihilation  of  personality.  "The 
religions  of  the  far  East,  Buddhism,  Brahminism,  Confucianism 
and  the  rest,  have  no  conception  of  God  as  a  Creator.  Metaphysical 
scepticism  is  their  bond  of  unity.  They  aspire  to  found  a  moral  law 
of  love  and  charity  precisely  on  the  invincible  ignorance  of  man  as 
to  his  origin  and  destiny."     Picard,  p.  230, 


274  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

Is  this  a  doctrine  fitted  to  elevate  or  benefit  souls?  Is  it  not 
rather  a  metaphysical  theory  fashioned  by  dreamers  and  for 
dreamers?  Annihilation!  what  an  incentive  to  the  practice 
of  virtue,  what  a  reward  for  a  good  life!  Yet  let  us  not  for- 
get, Buddhism  aims  to  be  practical ;  it  is  a  moral  end  which 
it  pursues. 

B.  Moral  Character. — Strange  and  full  of  error  is  the 
dogma  upon  which  the  moral  teaching  of  Buddhism  is  based. 
Yet  this  teaching  in  itself  is  elevating  and  pure  in  every 
respect:  it  prescribes  renunciation  and  repression  of  the 
passions.  At  the  same  time  the  renunciation  is  carried  to 
excess:  not  only  must  all  irregular  affection  be  eradicated 
from  the  heart,  but  every  desire,  every  affection.  The  duty 
of  the  Buddhist  monks — and  they  are  the  real  Buddhists; 
laymen  are  incapable  of  attaining  Nirvana — is  to  attain  a 
complete  inertia,  a  perfect  state  of  moral  quietude.  These 
Cramanas  (ascetics)  or  Bhikshus  (beggars),  besides  the 
obligation  of  fasts,  prayers,  corrections,  the  confession  of 
their  faults,  are  compelled  to  live  upon  alms,  to  practise 
celibacy,  and  to  bury  themselves  in  profound  meditation  on 
the  nothingness  to  which  they  aspire:  this  constitutes  their 
sole  occupation.  Those  who  are  not  monks  are  commanded 
above  all  to  love  men  and  to  desire  to  lead  them  to  Nirvana, 
that  is,  to  deliverance  from  the  inevitable  evils  of  existence. 
Appreciation. — 1st.  The  morahty  of  Buddhism  cannot,  as 
we  have  already  said,  be  called  moral  teaching,  since  it  is 
without  foundation;  it  does  not  emanate  from  God,  hence 
it  suggests  no  lawgiver,  no  judge,  no  pardon,  and  it  is  de- 
prived of  effectual  sanction,  for  annihilation  is  no  real  reward, 
and  existence  is  not  in  itself  a  punishment  fitted  to  deter  the 
evil-doer.  Moreover,  a  law  which  exists  of  itself  and  which 
fatally  produces  its  own  sanction  is  something  most  irrational 
and  hopeless.  For  the  Buddhist,  life,  in  whatever  form  it 
presents  itself,  is  one  long  chain  of  miseries — a  real  evil  of 
which  he  must  rid  himself  as  soon  as  possible.  And  to 
accomplish  this  end  he  must  pass  through  an  existence  not 


DIVINITY  OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  275 

only  deprived  of  every  enjoyment  and  earthly  pleasure,  but 
filled  with  continual  renunciation,  mortification,  and  penance. 
After  being  thus  tormented  during  one  or  several  existences, 
w^at  may  the  Buddhist  hope  for?  The  destruction  of  his 
individuality,  his  annihilation,  or  at  most  his  re-entrance  as 
an  atom  into  the  unconscious  mass  of  the  universe! 

2d.  Though  at  first  sight  the  moral  teaching  of  Buddhism 
presents  much  that  seems  elevating,  yet  in  reality  it  is  a  sort 
of  stoic  perfection— an  inertia  of  indifference  productive  of 
egotism  and  pride.  The  charity  of  Buddhism  is  in  contradic- 
tion to  one  of  its  chief  precepts  which  proscribes  all  affection, 
all  desire  even  for  fife  itself.  We  need  hardly  call  attention 
to  the  abyss  between  this  charity  and  the  charity  inculcated 
by  Christianity.  This  is  evident  even  to  unbehevers.  ''We 
must  recognize,"  says  the  rationalist  Oldenberg,  ''an  in- 
trinsic difference  between  these  two  principles  of  morality, 
the  sentiment  of  Buddhist  benevolence  and  Christian  charity. 
.  .  .  The  love  of  benevolence  manifest  in  Buddhist  morality — 
a  sentiment  half  negative  and  half  positive — may  be  said  to 
approach  Christian  charity,  but  does  not  come  up  to  it;  just 
as  the  beatitude  of  Nirvana,  though  radically  different 
from  the  Christian's  conception  of  beatitude,  presents,  never- 
theless, an  uncertain  and  vacillating  image  of  it.  The 
Buddhist  is  commanded,  not  so  much  to  love  his  neighbor, 
as  to  refrain  from  hating  him;  he  is  taught  to  excite  and 
foster  a  spirit  of  kindness  toward  all  creatures,  but  this 
spirit  is  not  the  effect  of  love,  but  rather  the  result  of  the 
deliberate  opinion  and  persuasion  that  everything  will  be 
better  in  the  world  under  the  influence  of  the  law  of  benevo- 
lence, and  that  he  who  practises  this  virtue  will  find  a  reward 
in  the  law  of  nature." 

Remark. — We  who  enjoy  the  benefit  of  Catholic  teaching 
are  in  no  way  astonished  at  the  relative  moral  perfection 
found  in  primitive  or  theoretic  Buddhism,  a  human  and 
philosophic  work.  We  know  that  after  the  fall  man  pre- 
served his  intellectual  and  moral  powers:    if  they  were 


276  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

weakened,  they  were  by  no  means  destroyed.  To  practise 
supernatural  virtues  we  need  the  help  of  divine  grace;  but 
this  grace  is  not  necessary  to  lead,  within  certain  limits,  a 
good  hfe  in  conformity  with  the  natural  law. 

2.  Practical  and  Popular  Buddhism. — ^What  we  have 
said  so  far  applies  only  to  primitive  and  theoretic  Bud- 
dhism, to  that  found  in  books.  Buddhism  is  quite  different 
in  its  popular  and  practical  reality.  Here  we  find  profound 
differences  between  it  and  Christianity.  By  one  of  those 
contradictions  unaccounted  for  by  scholars,  but  which  is 
an  incontestable  fact.  Buddhism,  while  posing  before  the 
elite  of  the  so-called  sages  with  the  prestige  of  free  thought, 
posed  at  the  same  time  before  the  people  with  the  attraction 
of  rehgious  formalism,  multipHed  idolatrous  rites  and  obser- 
vances, and  became  at  an  early  stage  a  sort  of  polytheism 
and  superstitious  magic.  "  The  instincts  of  the  human  heart,'' 
M.  de  Broglie  justly  observes,  ''were  stronger  than  theory: 
the  ideas  of  God  and  of  a  future  life  reappeared,  but  under  the 
form  of  superstition,  in  a  religion  of  which  the  proper  doc- 
trine is  atheism  and  nihilism." 

A  Word  in  Regard  to  the  Propagation  of  Buddhism. — 
It  is  easy  to  explain  the  astonishing  success  of  a  religious 
system  which  overthrew  Brahminism  and  threatened  even 
to  replace  it  completely.  The  rapid  propagation  of  Bud- 
dhism is  due  to  various  causes;  among  others,  the  religious 
and  social  protest  against  the  secular  tyranny  of  the  old 
Brahminism,  the  proclamation  of  fraternity,  and  the  aboli- 
tion of  castes,  which  powerfully  attracted  the  people.  Con- 
trary to  the  Brahmins,  who  reserved  to  themselves  the 
privilege  of  studying  and  teaching  the  science  of  religion  and 
the  means  of  attaining  final  beatitude,  Buddha  and  his 
disciples  preached  publicly  to  all  the  world;  they  declared 
all  men  equal  before  the  universal  Law,  and  called  women  as 
well  as  men  to  the  religious  life :  the  impure  Dasyu  as  well  as 
the  Brahmin,  the  criminal  as  well  as  the  ju'^t  man,  the  widow, 
the  forsaken  wife, — all  were  free  to  seek  an  honorable  and 


DIVINITY   OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  277 

peaceful  refuge  in  the  monastic  state.  Moreover,  the  poverty- 
taught  by  Buddhism,  and  its  wholly  natural  moraUty,  so 
tolerant  for  laymen,  could  not  excite  against  it  the  passions  of 
individuals  and  peoples.  Far  from  proscribing  superstition, 
it  encouraged  and  increased  every  kind.  Besides,  it  had 
long  enjoyed  the  protection  of  rulers;  it  was  only  after  having 
reigned  in  India  more  than  a  thousand  years,  in  competi- 
tion with  Brahminism,  that  it  spread  to  the  neighboring 
countries.^ 

Conclusion. — Let  us  conclude  this  sketch  of  Buddhism 
with  the  appreciation  of  it  given  by  the  learned  Orientalist, 
Mgr.  Harlez:  ''There  is  little  foundation  for  the  comparison 
which  writers  seek  to  establish  between  Christianity  and 
Buddhism.  Buddhism  possesses  a  few  rather  elevating 
moral  precepts,  and  that  is  all  that  can  be  said  for  it.  Its 
metaphysics  (or  dogmas)  are  absurd,  and  differ  in  no  way 
from  materialism.  It  is  the  same  in  regard  to  its  anthro- 
pologic and  cosmogonic  conceptions.  Its  moral  teaching 
is  based  upon  the  irrational  idea  of  metempsychosis,  and  the 
only  prospect  offered  disciples  is  a  hfe  spent  in  privations 
and  penance,  to  end  in  what?  Nothingness,  or  what  comes 
to  the  same  thing — ^the  destruction  of  personahty.  Men  of 
letters  among  modern  Buddhists  deny  the  charge  of  atheism: 
they  claim  to  honor  God  and  to  contemplate  Him  as  the 
universal  Law.  But  this  is  a  mere  evasion.  This  law  is  a 
pure  abstraction  and  can  never  be  a  personal  and  active 
being.  Compare  the  Our  Father  with  the  canonical  books 
of  Buddhism  and  we  shall  see  at  a  glance  the  infinite  distance 
which  separates  them." 

^See  Aiken;  Schanz,  II.,  ch.  2;  Lilly,  Claims,  ch.  2;  Anc.  Rel. 
ch.  3;  A.  C.  Q.  xiii.;  Harlez  inC.  S.  S.  L.  i.  I.  E.  R.  Dec.  1901; 
Bering,  E.  H.,  Esoteric  Buddhism;  C.  W.  Aug.  Sept.,  '95;  Picard, 
p.  293. 


278  CHEISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

X.  Tenth  Proof. 

THE  INCOMPARABLE   HOLINESS   OF  CHRIST.^ 

We  have  seen  the  eminent  holiness  of  the  dogmatic  and 
moral  teaching  of  Jesus.  His  whole  life  was  no  less  admir- 
able :  it  was  this  doctrine  put  in  practice ;  He  never  imposed 
a  precept  which  He  had  not  fulfilled  to  the  letter;  He  never 
preached  a  virtue  of  which  He  had  not  given  in  Himself  the 
most  perfect  example.  Contrary  to  the  general  practice  of 
legislators,  and  particularly  of  impostors,  He  taught  first  by 
example  and  then  by  precept  (Acts  i.  1).  Thus  in  teach- 
ing us  our  duties  toward  God,  toward  man,  toward  our- 
selves, He  could  truly  say:  "I  have  given  you  an  example, 
that  as  I  have  done,  so  do  you  also"  (John  xiii.  15). 

1st.  We  have  only  to  read  the  Gospel  to  be  convinced  that 
all  virtues  were  united  in  Jesus  in  such  a  divine  degree  and 
in  so  just  a  measure  as  to  make  Him  the  type,  the  ideal  of 
all  perfection.  From  His  infancy  and  during  His  whole  life 
the  sole  end  of  all  His  words,  of  all  His  actions  was  to  glorify 
God  by  causing  Him  to  be  known,  loved,  and  served,  and 
by  saving  mankind;  He  Himself  declares  that  He  cares  not 
for  His  own  glory,  that  He  does  only  what  is  pleasing  to  the 
Father.  During  His  whole  life  He  was  meek  and  gentle, 
grave  and  laborious,  submissive  and  patient. 

In  all  men,  even  the  most  perfect,  natural  infirmity  reveals 
itself  in  something;  the  ideal  perfection  found  in  biographies 
is  a  mixture  of  fiction  and  history;  but  in  Jesus,  and  in  Him 
only,  we  find  absolute  perfection  and  pure  historic  truth. 
This  unfathomable  perfection  never  faltered  in  the  various 
events  of  His  earthly  career,  in  the  intimate  familiarity  of 
friendship,  in  the  midst  of  the  multitude  when  harassed  by 
its  rudeness  and  importunity,  in  the  joyous  festivity  of  the 
marriage-feast  of  Cana,  in  the  agony  of  Gethsemane,  in  the 

^  See  Lives  of  Christ  by  Didon,  Fouard,  Maas,  Veuillot,  Elliott,  and 
Costello. 


DIVINITY   OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  279 

ignominy  of  His  Passion,  in  the  anguish  of  Calvary,  where 
He  expired  in  inexpressible  suffering,  abandoned  by  His 
own,  insulted  by  His  triumphant  enemies,  and  apparently 
abandoned  by  His  Father.  ''Never  will  it  be  possible  to 
rise  above  Christ,"  says  Strauss,  ''or  to  conceive  of  a  being 
equal  to  Him.''  "Jesus  Christ,"  says  Renan,  "will  never 
be  surpassed." 

2d.  His  virtue  was  so  pure,  so  incontestable,  that  He  could 
defy  His  bitterest  enemies,  who  watched  His  actions  and 
examined  His  words  in  order  to  ensnare  Him.  He  could  defy 
them  to  convince  Him  of  sin:  "Which  of  you  shall  convince 
Me  of  sin?"  And  during  His  Passion,  notwithstanding  the 
witnesses  bribed  to  testify  against  Him,  the  pagan  judge 
was  forced  to  proclaim  His  innocence  no  less  than  five  times. 
Moreover,  modern  impiety  itself,  after  seeking  in  all  His 
words  and  in  all  His  life  to  find  matter  of  condemnation, 
is  obliged  to  bow  before  Him  and  render  homage  to  His 
virtues.  If  it  refuses  to  bow  the  knee  before  His  divinity,  it 
readily  acknowledges  Him  as  the  wisest  of  men.  J.  J.  Rous- 
seau goes  so  far  as  to  confess  that  "if  the  hfe  and  death  of 
Socrates  are  those  of  a  sage,  the  hfe  and  death  of  Christ  are 
those  of  a  God." 

3d.  Yet  among  all  the  virtues  so  brilliantly  manifested  in 
Jesus  there  is  none  which  shines  with  greater  lustre,  which 
so  powerfully  won  the  hearts  of  His  followers,  as  His  en- 
chanting goodness.  It  would  be  necessary  to  quote  here 
the  whole  Gospel,  for  there  is  not  a  page  of  it  which  does  not 
record  the  most  touching  proofs  of  this  virtue. 

"Jesus,"  says  Lacordaire,  "carried  the  power  of  loving 
even  to  tenderness,  and  to  a  kind  of  tenderness  so  new  that  it 
was  needful  to  create  a  name  for  it,  and  that  it  should  form  a 
distinct  species  in  the  analysis  of  human  feelings — I  mean 
the  evangelic  unction.  Jesus  Christ  was  tender  toward  all 
men;  it  was  He  who  said:  'Whatsoever  you  shall  do  to  the 
least  of  these  My  brethren,  you  will  have  done  it  unto  Me ' 
(Matth.  XXV.  40),  an  expression  which  introduced  Christian 


280  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

fraternity  into  the  world,  and  which  still  daily  engenders 
love.  He  was  tender  toward  sinners;  He  sat  at  meat  with 
them,  and  when  doctrinal  pride  reproached  Him  for  it,  He 
replied :  '  I  am  not  come  for  those  that  are  in  health,  but  for 
those  that  are  sick'  (Matth.  ix.  12).  Perceiving  a  pubhcan 
who  cHmbed  up  into  a  tree  to  see  Him  pass  by,  He  says  to 
him,  '  Zaccheus,  make  haste  and  come  down,  for  this  day  I 
must  abide  in  thy  house '(Luke  xix.  5).  A  sinful  woman 
approaches  Him  and  even  ventures  to  anoint  His  feet  with 
ointment,  to  the  great  scandal  of  a  large  assembly;  He 
reassures  her  by  that  immortal  allocution :  '  Many  sins  are 
forgiven  her  because  she  has  loved  much'  (Luke  vii.  47). 
They  bring  before  Him  a  woman  taken  in  adultery,  in  order 
to  force  a  judgment  from  Him  which  by  its  very  leniency 
may  compromise  Him;  He  answers:  'He  that  is  without  sin 
among  you,  let  him  first  cast  a  stone  at  her'  (John  viii.  7). 
He  was  tender  toward  His  migratef ul  and  parricidal  country ; 
and,  beholding  its  walls  from  afar.  He  wept,  saying :  '  Jeru- 
salem! Jerusalem!  thou  that  killest  the  prophets,  and 
stonest  them  that  are  sent  unto  thee,  how  often  would  I 
have  gathered  together  thy  children,  as  the  hen  doth  gather 
her  chickens  under  her  wings,  and  thou  wouldst  not!' 
(Matth.  xxiii.  37).  He  was  so  tender  toward  His  fiiends  as  to 
wash  their  feet,  and  to  permit  a  very  yoimg  man  to  lean  upon 
His  breast  on  one  of  the  most  solemn  occasions  of  His  life. 
Even  at  His  crucifixion  He  was  tender  toward  His  execu- 
tioners, and,  Hfting  up  His  soul  to  His  Father  for  them.  He 
said:  'Father,  forgive  them,  for  they  know  not  what  they 
do'  (Luke  xxiii.  34).  No  earthly  fife  shows  such  a  blend- 
ing of  hght  and  love." 

We  must  confine  ourselves  here  to  a  general  glance  at  the 
life  of  Him  who  offered  Himself  as  model  to  all  men  without 
exception,  and  who  uttered  these  equally  astonishing  and 
true  words :  ''  I  am  the  Way,  the  Truth,  and  the  Life ;  He  that 
folio weth  Me  walketh  not  in  darkness."^ 

^  Lacordaire,  conf .  1  on  Jesus  Christ, 


DIVINITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  281 

Remarks.— 1st.  The  character  of  Jesus,  despite  its  incom- 
parable perfection,  is  natural  and  true;  it  offers  nothing  false, 
nothing  affected,  nothing  constrained.  If  the  divine  nature 
is  shown  by  the  absence  of  the  least  imperfection,  humanity 
is  equally  evident  in  the  truth  of  its  natural  emotions.  As 
Jesus  desired  to  teach  all  men.  His  brethren,  the  way  to 
heaven,  first  by  example  and  then  by  precept.  He  deigned  to 
experience  all  the  legitimate  sentiments  of  our  nature  and  to 
pass  through  all  our  trials.  ''We  have  not,"  says  St.  Paul, 
''a  high  priest  who  cannot  have  compassion  on  our  infirmi- 
ties, but  one  tempted  in  all  things  hke  as  we  are,  without  sin." 
Like  us  Jesus  labored,  prayed,  wept,  and  suffered.  Like  us 
He  loved  His  Mother,  His  disciples.  His  friends.  His  country, 
the  imfortunate,  the  abandoned;  like  us  He  experienced 
sadness,  compassion,  trouble,  fear,  weariness;  like  us,  and 
more  keenly  than  we.  He  felt  physical  and  moral  suffering. 
From  the  manger  to  the  cross,  in  every  action,  in  every 
sentiment,  He  could  offer  Himself  as  a  model  to  be  imitated. 

2d.  The  perfection  of  the  character  and  of  the  fife  of  Jesus 
was  the  more  striking  because  of  the  contrast  it  offered  to  all 
that  was  about  Him.  With  the  exception  of  His  blessed 
Mother,  and  a  few  chosen  souls  inspired  by  Him,  Jesus  met 
on  every  hand  a  vile  and  carnal  people,  hypocritical  Scribes, 
proud  Pharisees,  and  pure  formahsts,  disciples  full  of  them- 
selves and  of  gross  faults.  What  a  contrast  between  the 
weakness,  the  vice,  the  violence  by  which  He  was  surrounded, 
and  His  hohness.  His  dehcacy,  His  meekness,  His  patience! 
''Where  among  His  own  people  did  Jesus,"  says  Rousseau, 
"acquire  that  elevating  and  pure  morality  which  He  alone 
has  taught  by  example  and  by  precept?  From  the  bosom 
of  the  most  violent  fanaticism  issues  the  highest  wisdom, 
and  the  simplicity  of  the  most  heroic  virtues  honors  the 
vilest  of  people." 

3d.  The  holiness  of  Jesus  alone  is  a  creative  hohness :  despite 
the  incomparable  superiority  of  its  teachings,  none  are 
more  easily  followed;  hence  it  has  begotten  in  all  ages  in- 


282  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

numerable  disciples.  ''No  sage/'  says  Voltaire,  ''ever  had 
the  slightest  influence  on  the  morahty  of  even  his  immediate 
surroundings,  but  Christ  has  influenced  the  whole  world.'' 
The  example  of  Jesus,  no  less  than  His  teaching,  has  un- 
ceasingly produced  everywhere,  during  nineteen  centuries, 
miracles  of  obedience,  of  purity,  of  humility,  of  zeal,  of 
devotion,  and  of  hoHness.  True,  the  saints  also  have  had 
their  sanctifying  influence,  but  it  was  only  by  reproducing 
in  themselves  traits  of  the  perfection  they  contemplated  in 
Jesus. 

4th.  Still  another  thing  which  sets  forth  the  marvellousness 
of  the  teaching  and  the  example  of  Jesus  is  that  He  is  imitated 
in  that  which  is  most  repugnant  to  nature:  He  is  a  thorn- 
crowned  Leader,  and  His  disciples  must  f oUow  Him  in  His  life 
of  humility,  obedience,  abnegation,  and  sacrifice.  Whether 
we  study  Him  in  the  manger,  in  His  hidden,  in  His  public 
life;  whether  we  contemplate  Him  in  His  Passion  and  His 
death,  we  shall  find  Him  giving  us  everywhere  the  example 
of  virtues  most  opposed  to  our  evil  incHnations.  And  this 
example  is  followed:  "They  that  are  Christ's  have  crucified 
their  flesh  with  the  vices  and  concupiscences"  (Gal.  v.  24). 
Christians,  in  order  to  advance  in  perfection,  seek  only  to 
triumph  over  themselves  in  imitation  of  Him  whom  St.  Paul 
calls  "the  image  of  the  invisible  God"  (Coloss.  i.  15). 

5th.  If  Jesus  succeeded  by  His  word,  and  still  more  by  His 
example,  in  reforming  the  world,  it  was  because  He  made 
Himself  loved.  This  very  love  is  a  marvel  in  itself.  Great 
men  succeed  in  winning  admiration,  in  exciting  enthusiasm; 
but  who  among  the  rarest  geniuses  has  ever  won  and  retained 
the  love  of  posterity  during  long  ages?  "  One  man  alone, " 
says  Lacordaire,  "  has  won  from  all  ages  the  tribute  of  undying 
love;  He  alone  has  been  loved  with  a  strong  and  tender,  a 
deep  and  efficacious  love  by  countless  souls,  and  at  the  present 
day  millions  are  ready  to  die  for  Him."  Read  in  the  3d 
conf .  on  Jesus  Christ  the  eloquent  page  in  which  this  same 
orator  speaks  of  the  love  which  Jesus  Christ  excites  in  souls. 


DIVINITY  OF  THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.  283 

It  is  impossible  to  find  a  saint  who  has  not  loved  Jesus 
with  fervent  ardor.  "  Lord,  Thou  knowest  that  I  love  Thee, " 
St.  Peter  answers  with  sad  tenderness.  St.  Paul  declares 
that  nothing  can  separate  him  from  the  love  of  this  Jesus, 
whose  adorable  name  he  repeats  in  his  epistles  no  less  than 
two  hundred  and  forty-three  times.  St.  Augustine  cannot 
find  words  to  express  the  sweetness  contained  in  this  divine 
name.  St.  Bernard  declares  that  everything  is  insipid  to 
him  without  the  name  of  Jesus ;  he  says  it  is  as  honey  to  the 
taste,  music  to  the  ear,  joy  to  the  heart.  And  all  the  heroes 
of  Christianity  have  spoken  in  hke  manner. 

It  is  this  love  which  still  impels  so  many  souls  to  imitate 
Jesus  when  they  have  learned  His  divine  charms  and  inef- 
fable goodness;  and  their  imitation  of  Him  is  perfect  in 
proportion  to  the  purity  and  fervor  of  their  love.  What  is 
a  Christian  worthy  of  the  name  but  a  man  who  bears  in 
his  soul,  in  his  body,  in  his  whole  being,  the  deep  imprint  of 
Jesus,  a  man  who  strives  to  make  his  thoughts,  his  desires, 
his  words,  and  his  actions  conformable  to  those  of  his  divine 
Exemplar?  A  saint  is  only  a  grand  Christian  imitating 
Jesus  in  a  more  complete,  more  perfect,  more  heroic  manner. 

Conclusion. — The  mind  absolutely  refuses  to  believe  that 
Jesus,  this  type  of  the  highest  perfection,  desired  to  teach  us 
anything  but  truth.  Reason  will  never  admit  that  a  man 
could  unite  the  most  revolting  hypocrisy  with  the  purest 
and  most  subhme  doctrine,  with  the  most  admirable,  the  most 
perfect,  the  holiest  fife  recorded  in  the  annals  of  mankind.^ 

An  impostor,  moreover,  never  would  have  employed 
means  tending  to  defeat  his  enterprise;  far  from  flattering 
the  passions  and  caprices  of  His  fellow  beings.  He  did  not 

*  Infidels,  in  order  to  explain  the  rdle  of  Jesus,  are  obliged  to  have 
recourse  to  one  of  two  hypotheses,  that  He  was  either  a  fool  or  an 
impostor.  Renan,  however,  manages  to  make  Him  an  impostor 
deceiving  in  good  faith,  that  is,  a  hypocrite  and  fool  combined:  an 
explanation  more  inconceivable  than  the  others,  for  it  only  adds  an 
odious  to  an  absurd  hypothesis. 


284  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

ignore  their  faults,  He  did  not  seek  the  protection  of  the 
great  or  powerful  of  this  world,  He  did  not  seek  worldly- 
possessions.  On  the  contrary,  He  waged  war  against  vice, 
He  preached  the  forgiveness  of  injuries,  the  practice  of 
humility,  abnegation,  and  self-denial;  His  chosen  associates 
were  among  the  poor  and  the  disinherited;  He  carried  His 
disinterestedness  so  far  as  to  be  without  even  a  stone  upon 
which  to  rest  His  head.  Far  from  avoiding  the  suffering 
and  death  prepared  for  Him  by  His  enemies,  whose  designs 
He  knew  and  foretold.  He  went  to  meet  the  soldiers  charged 
to  seize  Him,  and  dehvered  Himself  into  their  hands.  And 
in  the  midst  of  the  most  terrible  outrages  and  the  most  cruel 
torments,  His  calmness  and  gentleness  never  faltered  for  a 
moment;  His  last  act  was  an  act  of  mercy,  and  His  last  word 
a  prayer  for  His  enemies.  Is  this  the  death,  is  this  the  life 
of  an  impostor?  Yet  Jesus  must  be  an  impostor  if  He  was 
not  sent  from  heaven,  for  He  pubhcly  proclaimed  that  He 
was  sent  by  God.  To  the  Samaritan  woman,  for  example, 
who  was  expecting  the  Messias,  He  solemnly  said:  This 
Messias  whom  you  await,  '^I  am  He  who  am  speaking  with 
thee."  Would  God  permit  the  most  sacrilegious  imposture 
to  be  confirmed  by  a  life  so  holy  that  human  reason  is 
forced  to  accept  its  testimony?  It  is  absolutely  impossible. 
Therefore  the  mission  of  Jesus  is  divine,  and  divine  also  is 
the  rehgion  He  came  to  establish. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  DIVINITY  OF   JESUS   CHRIST. 

The  divinity  of  Christ's  mission  means  the  divinity  of  His 
work.  This  is  the  question  of  which  we  have  been  treating  in 
the  preceding  pages.  The  divinity  of  His  person  is  a  question 
apart.  Moses  also  was  sent  by  God;  he  was  also  charged 
to  estabhsh  among  the  Jews  a  new  religion  superior  to  the 
one  which  preceded  it;  yet  it  never  entered  into  the  minds 
of  his  followers  to  adore  him  as  God.  Jesus,  on  the  contrary, 
has  been  adored  as  God  for  nineteen  centuries  by  followers 
who  glory  in  bearing  His  name  and  in  following  His  doc- 
trine. This  fact  is  indisputable ;  but  is  Jesus  entitled  to  this 
adoration,  is  He  really  God?  ^ 

This  is  the  important  question  which  now  presents  itself. 
It  belongs,  it  is  true,  to  a  course  of  Special  Dogmatics,  and 
not  to  Apologetics,  yet  we  do  not  feel  that  we  can  pass  it 
over  in  complete  silence.  As  we  have  been  occupied  up  to 
the  present  with  Our  Lord,  as  we  have  stated  the  prophecies 
which  announced  Him  and  those  which  He  Himself  uttered; 
as  we  have  spoken  of  His  life.  His  miracles.  His  Resurrection, 
of  His  influence  on  mankind,  etc.,  we  feel  it  incumbent  to 
say  a  few  words  of  that  which  crowns  and  explains  all — His 
divinity;  particularly,  as  this  central  and  fundamental  truth 
of  our  holy  religion  admits  of  the  most  brilliant  and  striking 
verification.  Relying  on  the  incontestable  proofs  which  we 
have  just  stated,  we  believe  in  the  divinity  of  the  mission  of 

*  Bougaud;  Didon,  Belief,  etc.;  Freppel;  Gratry;  Hedley;  Maas 
(Ch.  in  Type,  etc.);  Hunter,  II.,  tr.  11;  Morris,  The  Son  of  Man; 
Schanz,  11.,  ch.  16  ff.;  A.  C.  Q.  i.  100,  475;  M.  S.  H.,  Dec.  1901, 

385 


286  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

Jesus,  because  He  announced  Himself  as  sent  by  God ;  on  the 
authority  of  the  same  proofs  we  must  beheve  in  the  divinity 
of  His  person,  if  He  positively  proclaimed  Himself  God. 

Now  if  there  is  one  thing  that  has  been  incontestably 
proved  by  innumerable  and  clear  texts,  it  is  that  Jesus 
afhrmed  that  He  is  God.  He  declared  on  numerous  occa- 
sions, in  the  most  absolute  and  unequivocal  manner,  that  He 
is  God,  the  Son  of  God,  equal  in  all  things  to  His  Father 
who  sent  Him.     Let  us  prove  this  briefly.^ 

1.  A  very  simple  but  peremptory  argument  is  that  every 
unprejudiced  mind  is  completely  convinced,  by  the  mere 
reading  of  the  Gospel,  that  Jesus  proclaimed  Himself  God, 
equal  in  all  things  to  the  Father.  Thjs  conviction  is  not 
merely  the  effect  of  this  or  that  text  taken  out  of  the  context, 
but  of  the  whole  book.  The  special  object  of  St.  John's 
gospel,  as  ecclesiastical  writers,  St.  Jerome,  TertulHan,  and 
others,  affirm,  is  to  estabhsh  the  divinity  of  Christ;  and  this 
is  just  the  charge  rationalists  make  against  him.  This  is 
sufficiently  evident  in  the  beginning  and  the  conclusion  of 
the  work.     Here  is  the  beginning: 

''In  the  beginning  was  the  Word,  and  the  Word  was  with 
God,  and  the  Word  was  God.  The  same  was  in  the  beginning 
mth  God.  All  things  were  made  by  Him :  and  without  Him 
was  made  nothing  that  was  made.  In  Him  was  hfe,  and  the 
life  was  the  light  of  men.  .  .  .  And  the  Word  was  made  flesh, 
and  dwelt  among  us."  The  end  is  no  less  explicit:  ''These 
things  are  written  that  you  may  believe  that  Jesus  is  the 
Christ,  Son  of  God."  Now  when  a  Christian  is  convinced 
that  such  is  the  inevitable  result  of  reading  a  book  which  he 

^  We  must  content  ourselves  here  with  the  decisive  proof  furnished 
by  the  words  of  Christ  Himself.  See  Lacordaire,  conf.  1  on  Jesus 
Christ.  Dogmatic  theology  gives  other  equally  conclusive  proofs, 
drawn  from  the  prophecies  announcing  that  the  Messias  would  be 
God:  Isaias  xxxv.,  xxv.,  ix.,  xl.;  Bar.  iii.;  Ps.  xliv.,  cix.,  etc.;  or 
from  the  teaching  of  the  apostles :  Acts  iii. ;  Rom.  ix. ;  Phil.  ii.  •  Colo=^s. 
i.,  ii.;  Heb  i.,  etc.;  or  from  apostolic  traditions,  or  from  ecclesiasti- 
cal history^  etc 


THE  DIVINITY   OF   JESUS   CHRIST.  287 

justly  regards  as  inspired  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  it  becomes 
equally  clear  to  him  that  this  result  was  intended  by  God. 

Infidels  themselves,  if  in  good  faith,  must  admit  this 
conclusion,  since  they  all,  with  few  exceptions,  admire  Jesus 
as  the  wisest  of  men,  the  most  beautiful  character  that  the 
world  has  ever  seen,  the  ideal  of  perfection. 

2.  Let  us  now  review  the  gospels,  and  select  among  many 
texts  sufficient  to  make  it  evident  that  they  estabfish  the 
divinity  of  Jesus. 

1st.  Jesus  attributes  to  Himself  that  which  men  have 
always,  with  reason,  considered  as  belonging  to  God  alone. 
''  I  am  the  Way,  and  the  Truth,  and  the  Life  "  (John  xiv.  6). 
''  I  am  the  Light  of  the  world:  he  that  followeth  Me,  walketh 
not  in  darkness,  but  shall  have  the  light  of  life  "  (ib.  viii.  12). 
''  I  am  the  hving  bread,  which  came  down  from  heaven '^ 
(ib.  vi.  51).  "  He  that  eateth  My  flesh,  and  drinketh  My  blood, 
hath  everlasting  life:  and  I  will  raise  him  up  in  the  last  day  " 
(ib.  vi.  55).  ^'I  am  the  resurrection  and  the  fife:  he  that 
befieveth  in  Me  although  he  be  dead,  shall  five  "  (ib.  xi.  25). 
"  The  Son  of  man  shafi  send  His  angels,  and  they  shall  gather 
together  His  elect"  (Mark  xiu.  27).  "  The  Son  of  man  shafi 
send  His  angels,  and  they  shafi  gather  out  of  His  kingdom 
afi  scandals,  and  them  that  work  iniquity"  (Matth.  xiu.  41). 
"  For  as  the  Father  raiseth  up  the  dead,  and  giveth  fife,  so 
the  Son  also  giveth  fife  to  whom  He  wifi ''  (John  v.  21).  ''  For 
where  there  are  two  or  three  gathered  together  in  My  name, 
there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them  "  (Matth.  xvifi.  20).  ''  What- 
soever you  ask  the  Father  in  My  name  He  wifi  give  it  to  you. 
Whatsoever  you  shall  ask  the  Father  in  My  name,  that  will  I 
do"  (John  XV.  16;  xiv.  13).  ''And  every  one  that  hath  left 
house,  or  brethren,  or  sisters,  or  father,  or  mother,  or  wife,  or 
children,  or  lands  for  My  name's  sake,  shall  receive  an  hun- 
dred fold,  and  shafi  possess  life  everlasting  "  (Matth.  xix.  29). 
"  For  what  things  soever  the  Father  doth,  these  the  Son  also 
doth  in  like  manner  "  (John  v.  19).  "  If  any  one  love  Me,  he 
wifi  keep  My  word,  and  My  Father  wifi  love  him,  and  We 


288  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

mil  come  to  him,  and  will  make  our  abode  with  him" 
(ib.  xiv.  23).  ''All  things  whatsoever  the  Father  hath  are 
Mine"  (ib.  xvi.  15). 

Our  Saviour  attests  His  divinity  no  less  clearly  when  He 
forgives  sin  (Luke  v.  21-24) ;  when  He  declares  that  He  will 
send  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  the  Father  hath  sent  Him  (John 
xiv.  26 ;  XV.  26) ;  when  He  announces  that  He  will  come  at 
the  end  of  the  world,  to  judge  the  hving  and  the  dead,  and  to 
render  to  each  one  according  to  his  works  (Matth.  xxv. 
31-46). 

If  we  would  appreciate  the  conclusive  evidence  of  these 
texts,  let  us  suppose  for  a  moment  that  they  are  uttered  by 
a  simple  mortal ! 

Jesus  proclaims  Himself  eternal:  ''Before  Abraham  was 
made  I  am"  (John  viii.  58).  Observe  the  analogy  between 
this  expression  and  that  which  David  uses  in  speaking  of 
God:  "Before  the  mountains  were  made,  .  .  .  Thou  art 
God"  (Ps.  Ixxxix.  2).  It  recalls  also  the  subHme  definition 
which  God  gives  of  Himself,  "I  am  who  am."  "And  now 
glorify  Thou  Me,  0  Father,  with  Thyself,  with  the  glory 
which  I  had,  before  the  world  was,  with  Thee  "  (John  xvii.  5). 
He  shows  that  He  knows  all  things,  even  the  most  secret 
recesses  of  the  human  heart  (Matth.  ix.  4).  He  is  omnipo- 
tent, for  it  is  by  His  own  power  that  He  will  return  to  life 
(John  X.  18).  The  miracles  which  He  works  and  which 
suppose  a  divine  power  are  performed  in  His  own  name  and 
by  His  own  merits.  Other  thaumaturges  work  miracles  in 
the  name  of  God,  in  virtue  of  a  delegated  power;  it  was  as 
sovereign  Master  that  Jesus  commanded  nature,  men,  angels, 
and  demons:  "Young  man,  I  say  to  thee,  arise"  (Luke  vii. 
14).  "I  will,  be  thou  made  clean  "  (Matth.  viii.  3).  "  Lazarus, 
come  forth  from  the  tomb"  (John  xi.  43),  etc.  The  source 
of  this  power  is  so  truly  within  Him  that  a  miraculous  virtue 
escapes,  so  to  speak,  from  His  divine  person,  without  His 
knowledge,  as  we  see  in  the  healing  of  the  issue  of  blood. 
Moreover,   not  only  does  He  exercise  at   will  this  power 


THE    DIVINITY   OF    JESUS   CHRIST.  289 

which  belongs  to  Him  by  right,  but  He  delegates  it  to  whom 
He  pleases;  He  promises  His  apostles  that  they  shall  work 
in  His  name  miracles  more  marvellous  than  His  own. 

2d.  Jesus  clearly  affirms  His  identity  with  the  nature  of 
His  Father,  as  well  as  the  distinction  of  persons,  and  con- 
sequently claims  the  worship  and  honors  due  to  God  alone. 
''I  and  the  Father  are  one"  (John  x.  30).  You  believe  in 
God,  said  He  to  His  apostles,  beheve  also  in  Me  (ib.  xiv.  1). 
^'God  so  loved  the  world  as  to  give  His  only-begotten  Son.'' 
''He  that  belie veth  in  Him  is  not  judged;  but  he  that 
doth  not  beheve  in  Him  is  already  judged:  because  he 
beheveth  not  in  the  name  of  the  only-begotten  Son  of  God  " 
(ib.  iii.  16, 18).  He  wishes  us  to  pray  to  Him  even  as  we 
would  to  the  Father  (ib.  xiv.  13;  xvi.  23,  24).  While  He 
proclaims  the  divine  precept:  The  Lord  thy  God  shalt 
thou  adore,  and  Him  only  shalt  thou  serve.  He  permits 
Himself  to  be  adored  by  the  man  bom  bhnd,  by  the  holy 
women,  and  by  His  disciples  (ib.  ix.  38;  Matth.  xxviii.  9-17). 
He  declares  that  all  men  should  honor  the  Son  as  they 
honor  the  Father  (John  v.  23).  When  St.  Thomas,  finally 
convinced  of  the  Resurrection  of  his  Master,  said  to  Him, 
''My  Lord  and  my  God,"  far  from  censuring  these  words 
as  blasphemous,  Jesus  publicly  approved  the  faith  of  His 
disciple,  and  blessed  those  who  in  future  ages  would  imitate 
his  example  (ib.  xx.  28,  29). 

3d.  Let  us  mention  particularly  a  few  solemn  occasions 
when,  in  presence  of  His  disciples,  of  His  enemies,  or  of  His 
very  judges,  or  the  great  council  of  His  nation,  Jesus  pro- 
claimed His  divinity  in  the  most  positive  and  formal  manner. 
We  shall  see  that  even  those  who  pursued  Him  with  implacable 
hatred  never  misapprehended  the  meaning  of  His  words. 

He  questioned  His  disciples  one  day  about  Himself: 
"Whom  do  you  say  that  I  am?"  Simon  Peter  answered 
and  said:  "Thou  art  Christ  the  Son  of  the  living  God." 
Far  from  rejecting  this  clear  and  positive  profession  of  faith, 
Jesus  praises  His  disciple  for  it,  and  declares  it  to  be  inspired 


290  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

by  His  Father  in  heaven,  since  He  alone  could  make  known 
the  mystery  of  the  eternal  generation  (Matth.  xvi.  13-18). 

On  another  occasion,  Jesus  being  in  the  midst  of  the  people, 
they  said  to  Him:  ''How  long  dost  Thou  hold  our  souls  in 
suspense?  If  Thou  be  the  Christ,  tell  us  plainly."  Jesus 
answered:  ''I  speak  to  you  and  you  believe  not:  the  works 
that  I  do  in  the  name  of  My  Father,  they  give  testimony  of 
Me.  ...  I  and  the  Father  are  one."  On  hearing  these  words 
the  Jews  took  up  stones  to  stone  Him  as  a  blasphemer. 
Jesus,  midisturbed  by  their  threats,  and  far  from  retracting, 
said  to  them:  ''Many  good  works  I  have  showed  you  from 
My  Father;  for  which  of  those  works  do  you  stone  Me?" 
The  Jews  answered  Him:  "For  a  good  work  we  stone  Thee 
not,  but  for  blasphemy;  and  because  that,  being  a  man. 
Thou  makest  Thyself  God."     (John  x.) 

Behold  Him  now  before  the  Sanhedrin,  the  supreme  re- 
hgious  tribunal  of  His  nation.  The  high  priest  puts  the 
ciuestion  formally  in  the  most  unequivocal  terms:  "I  adjure 
Thee  by  the  livhig  God  that  Thou  tell  us  if  Thou  be  the  Christ 
the  Son  of  God."  "  Thou  hast  said  it,"  Jesus  calmly  replies. 
And  to  confirm  this  categorical  affirmation  He  adds:  "  Never- 
theless, I  say  to  you,  hereafter  you  shall  see  the  Son  of 
man  sitting  on  the  right  hand  of  the  power  of  God,  and  coming 
in  the  clouds  of  heaven."  On  hearing  these  words,  the  high 
priest  rent  his  garments,  saying:  "What  further  need  have 
we  of  witnesses?  Behold,  now  you  have  heard  the  blasphemy ; 
what  think  you?  But  they  answering  said:  He  is  guilty 
of  death."     (Matth.  xxvi.  63,  64,  65,  66.) 

From  this  tribunal  Jesus  is  led  to  the  Roman  governor, 
who,  convinced  of  His  innocence,  is  about  to  release  Him,  but 
the  princes  of  the  people  cry:  "We  have  a  law;  and  accord- 
ing to  the  law  He  ought  to  die,  because  He  made  Himself 
the  Son  of  God"  (John  xix.).  On  Calvary  we  hear  this  sig- 
nificant insult:  "If  Thou  be  the  Son  of  God,  come  down  from 
the  cross."  Then  they  who  were  converted  by  the  spectacle 
of  this  divine  death  strike  their  breasts  and  exclaim:    "In- 


THE    DIVINITY   OF   JESUS    CHRIST.  291 

deed  this  was  the  Son  of  God"  (Matth.  xxvii.).  Because  He 
affirmed  His  divinity  Christ  was  condemned  and  suffered 
death. 

3.  Jesus,  not  satisfied  with  pubhcly  proclaiming  His 
divinity,  cites  in  support  of  His  affirmation  the  testimony 
of  His  works:  miracles,  the  infalhble  signs  of  truth,  create 
faith  in  His  words.  When,  for  example,  the  Scribes  and 
Pharisees,  scandaUzed  that  He  forgVes  sins,  accuse  Him 
of  blasphemy.  He  contents  Himself  with  replying:  '^  That  you 
may  know  that  the  Son  of  man  has  power  on  earth  to  for- 
give sins,  I  say  to  thee"  (addressing  the  man  sick  of  the 
palsy),  ''Arise,  take  up  thy  bed,  and  go  into  thy  house" 
(Luke  V.  24).  A^ain,  ^'BeUeve  you  not,"  He  says  else- 
where, "that  I  am  in  the  Father  and  the  Father  in  Me? 
Otherwise  believe  for  the  very  work's  sake"  (John  xiv.  11). 
''The  works  that  I  do  in  the  name  of  My  Father,  they  give 
testimony  of  Me  "  (ib.  x.  25).  ''  If  I  do  not  the  works  of  My 
Father,  believe  Me  not;  but  if  I  do,  though  you  will  not  be- 
lieve Me,  believe  the  works :  that  you  may  know  and  believe 
that  the  Father  is  in  Me,  and  I  in  the  Father  "  (ib.  x.  37,  38). 

Remakk. — Jesus  Christ  is  at  the  same  time  perfect  God 
and  perfect  man.  Equal  to  the  Father  according  to  the 
divinity.  He  is  less  than  the  Father  according  to  the  humanity. 
The  divine  nature  and  the  human  are  closely  imited  in  the 
person  of  the  Word.  "For  as  the  rational  soul  and  the 
flesh  is  one  man,  so  God  and  man  is  one  Christ,"  says  the 
Athanasian  Creed.  Consequently  we  can  and  we  should 
attribute  to  Jesus  Christ,  God-man,  all  the  properties  and 
all  the  actions  of  both  natures.  Hence  it  is  true  to  say 
of  Jesus  that  He  is  eternal,  and  at  the  same  time  that  He 
was  bom  and  that  He  died.  These  propositions  do  not 
contradict  each  other,  they  refer  to  the  qualities  of  these 
two  different  natures:  if  Jesus  is  eternal  as  God,  as  man 
He  is  mortal.  Therefore,  the  same  person  being  both  God 
and  man,  Jesus,  though  the  Son  of  God,  could  call  Himself 
the  Sou  of  man,  could  declare  His  Father  greater  than  He, 


292  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

could  say  that  there  were  things  that  only  His  Father  knew, 
that  Ilis  Father  had  abandoned  Him,  etc. 

It  gives  us  pleasure  to  add  that  it  is  in  virtue  of  this  same 
law,  called  in  theology  communicatio  idiomatum,^  that  Mary, 
though  only  a  creature,  is  justly  styled  the  Mother  of  God. 
No  doubt  this  holy  and  spotless  virgin  did  not  give  birth  to 
the  divine  nature,  but  she  bore  a  Son  who  is  God.  This  will 
be  her  eternal  honor;  it  also  justifies  the  special  homage  and 
hyperduHa  worship  offered  her  throughout  all  Christian  ages. 
How  could  a  disciple,  a  brother  of  Jesus  Christ,  not  place 
all  confidence  in  her  whom  God  chose  to  be  the  Mother  of  His 
well-beloved  Son  in  whom  He  is  well  pleased;  in  her  whom 
the  Doctors  and  saints  of  the  Church  have  been  pleased  to 
call  the  all-powerful  advocate;  in  her,  finally,  whom  Jesus, 
dying  on  the  cross,  bequeathed  to  us  as  mother,  and  whom 
He  made  so  kind,  so  tender,  so  merciful  that  she  might  help 
us  to  bear  with  patience  the  trials  of  this  fife  and  attain  a 
happy  eternity  with  Him?  ^ 

Conclusion. — It  is  as  evident  that  Jesus  is  truly  God  as 
that  He  was  sent  by  God.^  Hence  we  have  only  to  cast  our- 
selves at  His  feet,  and,  with  hearts  burning  with  gratitude 
and  love,  exclaim  with  Thomas,  ^'  My  Lord  and  my  God!  " 

^  On  this  communication  of  properties  or  attributes  see  Hunter, 
II.,  n.  537. 

2  Newman,  Difficulties  of  Angl.,  II.,  letter  to  Pusey;  Br.  W.  vii 
416,  viii.  59,  186;  Concilio,  Knowledge  of  Mary;  Ward,  Devotional 
Essays,  1-4;  Ryder,  Cath.  Controversy,  p.  II.,  charge  1,  §3;  Petita- 
lot,  The  Virgin  Mother;  Jeanjacquot,  Simple  Expjlanations  concerning 
the  Most  Holy  Virgin;  J.  L.  Spalding,  lect.  1.  8;  Gans,  Mariolatry;  M., 
Oct.  1902;  Card.  Gibbon,  Faith  of  0.  F.,  ch.  14,  and  in  A.  C.  Q.  iii.; 
Hunter,  II.,  tr.  12. 

^  To  the  objection:  If  Christ  were  God,  the  whole  world  would  have 
acknowledged  him  as  God,  Picard  replies:  ''Such  an  assertion  takes 
for  granted  that  God  cannot  reveal  Himself  except  in  an  irresistible 
manner,  repressing  along  with  liberty  of  faith  the  possibility  of 
merit"  (p.  273). 


THE  DIVINITY  OF  JESUS  CHRIST.  293 


Summary    of   the   Ten    Proofs.      Conclusion    of   the 

First  Part. 

1.  We  have  stated  some  of  the  fundamental  proofs  of  the 
Christian  religion.  The  greater  number  of  these  proofs,  even 
if  taken  separately,  are  irresistibly  convincing;  one  alone, 
duly  considered,  suffices  to  carry  conviction  to  every  honest 
and  unprejudiced  mind.  To  estabhsh  any  truth  whatever, 
all  that  is  required,  in  fact,  is  one  good  argument;  when  this 
argument  exists  all  the  objections  are  necessarily  of  no  real 
value;  they  cannot  but  be  specious.  Now  here  we  have  a 
host  of  proofs  from  various  sources  in  favor  of  the  divinity 
of  the  Christian  religion,  and  when  each  one  of  them  is  so 
conclusive  in  itself,  what  must  they  be  if  we  take  them,  as  we 
should,  as  a  magnificent  whole? 

How  can  we  reasonably  doubt  the  divinity  of  a  rehgion  in 
favor  of  which  can  be  cited  the  universal  expectation  of  ages 
anterior  to  the  Christian  era ;  the  entire  history  of  the  Jewish 
people;  the  accomphshment  of  promises,  prophecies,  and 
figures;  the  superior  character  of  the  evangelical  doctrine; 
the  hohness  of  the  life  of  its  Author,  the  authority  and  great 
number  of  His  miracles  and  His  prophecies;  the  no  less 
wonderful  works  of  His  apostles  and  disciples  to  whom  He 
promised  the  power  of  working  miracles;  the  estabhshment, 
propagation,  and  preservation,  humanly  unaccountable,  of 
the  religion  which  He  founded;  the  conversion  of  the  world 
to  this  religion,  which  thwarted  all  its  passions  and  con- 
tradicted all  the  reigning  ideas ;  the  transformation  of  society, 
of  laws,  and  of  morals;  the  unceasing  testimony  of  martyrs; 
the  assent  of  the  greatest  geniuses  the  world  ever  produced; 
the  adoration  and  love  of  noblest  hearts ;  the  beautiful  fruits 
produced  in  souls  by  the  vivifying  breath  of  the  Gospel; 
marvels  without  number  of  humility,  of  charity,  of  purity,  and 
abnegation  of  which  the  world  never  dreamed ;  the  successive 
defeat  of  men  and  systems  hostile  to  it;  the  faith  and  piety 


294  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

which  sprung  with  new  hfe  in  the  midst  of  assaults  and 
denials;  the  unexpected  return  of  minds  to  the  faith  just 
when  her  cause  seemed  lost?  All  this,  in  fact,  constitutes 
the  most  briUiant  proof  of  our  faith,  and  superabundantly 
justifies  the  belief  of  the  innumerable  generations  who  have 
chosen  to  follow  the  standard  of  the  cross.  If  arguments 
of  such  a  character  establish  only  a  colossal  error,  prostrating 
the  greater  part  of  the  civihzed  world,  including  the  greatest 
geniuses  of  mankind,  at  the  feet  of  an  infamous  impostor, 
what  must  we  think  of  the  wisdom  and  goodness  of  God? 
Yes;  God  is  wise  and  good,  hence  He  has  prepared  numer- 
ous and  convincing  proofs  in  order  that  we  may  accept 
revelation,  not  bhndly,  but  with  an  eminently  reasonable 
assent  truly  worthy  of  Him. 

2.  This  holy  religion  which  Christ  taught  the  world  is 
binding  upon  all  men  until  the  end  of  time.  The  same  facts 
which  estabhsh  that  God  placed  Himself,  by  means  of  His 
incarnate  Son,  in  direct  and  immediate  relation  with  man, 
force  us  to  recognize  the  strict  obligation  on  our  part  to 
enter  into  this  order  of  grace  and  glory  founded  by  Him 
for  our  benefit.  No  doubt  in  calling  us  to  Christianity  and 
making  us  His  children  by  adoption,  and  heirs  of  heaven, 
God  performed  an  act  of  love,  but  it  was  also  an  act  of  au- 
thority. Our  sovereign  Master  wdlled  that  we  should  accept 
the  gifts  which  His  goodness  offered  us.  His  infinite  majesty 
cannot  but  claim  the  glory  which  He  expects  from  His 
chosen  creature. 

Moreover,  our  supernatural  regeneration  cost  the  Son  of 
God,  Our  Saviour,  so  dear,  that  religion,  which  assures  us  the 
benefits  of  it  by  applying  to  us  the  merits  of  His  blood,  cannot 
be  an  institution  which  we  are  free  to  reject  or  accept. 
''Jesus  Christ  has  left  a  creed  to  enlighten  the  world;  com- 
mandments to  guide  it ;  sacraments,  a  sacrifice,  and  priesthood 
to  sanctify  it;  His  own  representatives  to  rule  it  till  the  end 
of  time.  Thirty  years  He  consecrated  to  His  work,  which  was 
only  terminated  on  the  sorrowful  tree  of  the  cross.     How 


THE   DIVINITY   OF  JESUS   CHRIST.  295 

could  it  ever  be  possible  to  preserve  our  claims  to  heaven 
and  yet  refuse  to  see  a  dogma  in  this  creed,  a  law  in  this 
decalogue,  a  sacrifice  on  this  cross,  and  a  divine  institution 
in  this  Church?  It  would  be  the  most  groundless  preten- 
sion that  could  be  imagined."  (Mgr.  Bresson.)  The  will 
of  the  divine  Legislator  is  manifested  on  this  point  with  a 
clearness  which  leaves  no  room  for  doubt.  When  leaving 
the  world  He  said  to  His  apostles:  '^Go  ye  into  the  whole 
world,  and  preach  the  Gospel  to  every  creature.  He  that 
beheveth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved;  but  he  that  be- 
lieveth  not  shall  be  condemned."  (Mark  xvi.  15,  16.) 
"God,"  says  St.  Paul,  "hath  exalted  His  Son,  and  hath 
given  Him  a  name  which  is  above  every  name;  that  in  the 
name  of  Jesus  every  knee  should  bow  of  those  that  are  in 
heaven,  on  earth,  and  under  the  earth"  (Phil.  ii.  9,  10). 
"There  is  one  God  and  one  Mediator  between  God  and  men, 
the  man  Christ  Jesus,  who  gave  Himself  a  redemption  for  all " 
(1  Tim.  ii.  5, 6) ;  and  again  he  says  that  God  hath  chosen  "  to 
re-estabhsh  all  things  in  Christ,  .  .  .  and  hath  subjected  all 
things  under  His  feet"  (Eph.  i.  10,  22).  And  in  the  Acts  we 
read  that  Jesus  "is  the  stone  which  was  rejected  by  the 
builders,  which  is  become  the  head  of  the  corner:  ...  for 
there  is  no  other  name  under  heaven  given  to  men  whereby 
we  must  be  saved  "  (iv.  11,  12).^ 

3.  The  best  of  civilized  mankind  has  believed  in  the  divinity 
of  the  Christian  religion.  And  yet  we  find,  even,  among 
scholars,  men  who  reject  all  revealed  religion  or  who  go  so 
far  as  to  profess  a  degrading  and  hopeless  materialism.  The 
various  causes  of  this  deplorable  blindness  are  set  forth  in 
many  works. ^ 

No  doubt  ignorance  in  matters  of  religion  is,  particularly 
in  the  present  day,  one  of  the  chief  causes  of  unbelief.     But 

^MacCarthy,  Sermon  on  Unbelief:  fragment  of  a  sermon  on  in- 
difference in  matters  of  religion. 

'  Laforet,  Why  Men  do  Not  Believe;  Lacordaire,  conf.  15,  16,  on 
Cath.  Doctrine  and  the  Mind;  M.  xlvi.  531. 


296  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

the  most  usual  cause  among  young  men  who  have  received 
a  religious  education  is,  unquestionably,  immorality.  For, 
as  Mgr.  Freppel  recently  said:  ''That  which  prevents  our 
seeing  clearly  the  things  of  God  is  the  great  predominance 
of  the  senses  over  the  mind.  The  passions  are  like  dense 
vapors  which,  rising  from  the  depths  of  the  conscience,  place 
themselves  between  the  eye  of  the  soul  and  the  sun  of  truth 
and  intercept  the  rays  of  eternal  justice.  Remove  this  veil 
and  light  will  appear,  and  religion  will  shine  forth  in  all 
the  splendor  of  its  incomparable  certainty."^ 

Religion  curbs  the  passions,  it  commands  man  to  rule  his 
senses,  instead  of  letting  them  rule  him;  it  commands  him, 
according  to  the  beautiful  expression  of  Descartes,  to  keep 
his  heart  so  high  that  matter  cannot  reach  him.  This  is 
what  we  dread  in  religion,  this  is  what  constrains  and  vexes 
us,  and  we  affect  not  to  believe  it  in  order  to  be  dispensed 
from  doing  what  it  prescribes.  Nothing  is  more  true  than 
this  celebrated  saying  of  Euler:  ''If  the  theorems  of  Euclid 
were  moral  precepts,  they  would  have  been  denied  long  ago." 

But  great  minds  are  most  frequently  united  to  noble 
hearts.  Therefore  in  all  ages  the  greatest  men  have  been  men 
of  strong  faith,  sincere  Christians.  No  one  certainly  would 
class  as  feeble-minded  men  Athenagoras,  Arnobius,  Epipha- 
nius,  Justin,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Origen,  Mintius  Felix, 
Cyprian,  Gregory,  Cyril,  Ambrose,  Augustine,  and  many 
others,  who  in  the  first  ages  of  the  Church  believed  with 
fervent  faith  and  displayed  rare  eloquence  in  the  defence  of 
their  belief.  Who  would  venture  to  tax  with  weak  credulity 
Alfred  the  Great,  St.  Thomas  Aquinas,  St.  Bonaventure, 
St.  Anselm,  Bossuet,  Fenelon,  Malebranche,  Bacon,  Des- 
cartes, Newton,  Leibnitz,  Euler,  and  innumerable  others 
who  have  never  ceased  to  appreciate  and  admire  the  truths  of 
Christianity? 

And    even    the   last   century,    so   justly    proud   of    its 
admirable  discoveries,  includes  a  multitude  of  scholars  of 
^  Lacordaire,  ib.,  conf.  14, 17, 18, 19. 


THE   DIVINITY   OF  JESUS   CHRIST.  297 

every  kind  who  have  never  faltered  in  their  complete  and 
entire  allegiance  to  the  truths  of  revelation.  And  to  men- 
tion only  representatives  of  sciences  which  are  frequently 
made  to  contradict  revelation,  there  is  no  doubt  that  the 
testimony  of  men  like  Volta,  A.  M.  Ampere,  Elie  de  Beaumont, 
Cauchy,  Biot,  Hermite,  Puiseux,  Le  Verrier,  de  Blainville, 
Gratiolet,  Secchi,  Thenard,  J.  B.  Dumas,  Andre  Dumont, 
d'Omalius,  d'Halloy,  Van  Beneden,  and  many  others,  is 
quite  equal  to  that  of  men  like  Moleschott,  Vogt,  Buchner, 
and  their  companions  in  unbelief.  It  would  be  easy  to  make 
this  list  of  learned  Catholics  of  the  present  day  much  longer, 
but  this  enumeration  may  serve  as  a  subsidiary  proof  of  the 
truth  of  our  holy  faith.  ^ 

Supported  by  such  a  vast  and  noble  company  we  have  no 
reason  to  fear  that  we  shall  be  accused  of  blindly  or  impru- 
dently accepting  revealed  truth.  ^    We  can  say  in  the  words 

^  See  references  to  P.  II.,  ch.  5,  art.  3. 

^  "  The  Pharisees  of  modern  as  of  ancient  times  would  fain  persuade 
us  that  the  common  people  are  credulous,  whereas  only  those  of  re- 
fined and  cultivated  minds  can  be  free  from  error.  But  even  if  we 
admit  this  distinction,  does  it  follow  that  no  Christians  are  highly 
cultured  men?  .  .  .  Has  not  every  country  possessed  its  men  of  sound 
logic,  strong,  good  sense,  of  clear  discernment  and  prudence,  and  of 
practical  knowledge  of  life,  who  have  not  the  less  been  good  Catho- 
lics? If  such  men  as  these,  placed  in  circumstances  which  enabled 
them  ...  to  form  a  right  judgment  after  weighing  well  the  argu- 
ments on  both  sides,  have  been  able  to  arrive  at  a  definite  conclusion 
and  to  become  ardent  believers,  surely  our  opponents  must  admit 
that  there  remains  something  to  be  said  in  behalf  of  the  faith  which 
they  consider  so  utterly  contemptible. 

"Moreover,  several  of  the  boldest  and  most  daring  Protestants 
in  Germany,  France,  and  England  have  arrived  at  the  conviction, 
after  free  inquiry  and  in  the  unconstrained  exercise  of  their  private 
judgment,  that  the  Christian  facts  are  true  and  that  the  foundations 
of  Christianity  are  impregnable.  The  belief  of  thinkers  and  critics 
of  this  class  proves  very  well  that,  though  the  proofs  of  Christianity 
may  be  assailed,  they  cannot  be  demolished.  Hence  the  fact  that 
some  learned  men  do  not  believe  in  it  is  by  no  means  a  conclusive 
argument  against  Christianity."     Picard,  p.  615  f. 


298  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

of  the  illustrious  mathematician  Cauchy:  ^'I  am  a  Christian, 
that  is,  I  believe  in  the  divinity  of  Jesus  Christ,  with  Tycho 
Brahe,  Copernicus,  Descartes,  Newton,  Fermal,  Leibnitz, 
Pascal,  Grimaldi,  Euler,  Gudlin,  Boscowich,  Gerdil;  with  all 
the  great  astronomers,  physicians,  geometricians  of  past 
ages.  I  am  a  Catholic  with  the  majority  of  them,  and  I  am 
ready  to  give  a  reason  for  my  faith.  My  convictions  are  not 
the  result  of  inherited  prejudices,  but  of  a  profound  exam- 
ination. I  am  a  sincere  Catholic  with  Corneille,  Racine,  la 
Bruyere,  Bossuet,  Bourdaloue,  Fenelon;  with  the  most  dis- 
tinguished men  of  our  age,  with  those  who  have  done  most 
for  science,  philosophy,  and  literature;  with  those  who  have 
been  the  most  illustrious  members  of  our  institutions.  I 
share  the  profound  convictions  expressed  in  the  words,  the 
actions,  and  the  writings  of  our  greatest  scholars,  Ruffini, 
Haiiy,  Laennec,  Ampere,  Pelletier,  Freycinet,  Coriolis;  and 
if  I  refrain,  out  of  regard  for  their  modesty,  from  mentioning 
others,  I  can  say  at  least  that  it  gave  me  great  pleasure 
to  find  all  the  nobility  and  generosity  of  the  Christian  faith 
in  my  illustrious  friends,  in  the  inventor  of  crystallography 
(Canon  Haiiy),  in  the  celebrated  navigator  of  the  Uranie 
(Claude  Marie  de  Freycinet),  and  in  the  immortal  author 
of  electro-dynamics  (Andre-Marie  Ampere)/' 


PART  SECOND. 
THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH, 


CHAPTER  I. 

GENERAL  NOTIONS. 

I.    Our  Object. 

Relying  on  the  testimony  of  the  Old  and  the  New  Testa- 
ment, historic  docimients  of  incontestable  authority,  we  have 
conclusively  proved  the  divinity  of  the  Christian  religion.  But 
where  is  the  true  Christianity,  preached  and  imposed  upon 
mankind  by  Jesus  Christ,  to  be  found?  This  is  the  important 
question  we  have  now  to  solve. 

The  Christian  religion,  instituted  to  be  practised  by  all 
men,  does  not  and  cannot  exist  in  an  abstract  state.  It  is 
presented  to  us  by  a  concrete  society  called  the  Church,  a 
visible  society,  which  professes  the  doctrines  of  Christ  and 
observes  His  laws. 

There  are  many  religious  societies,  each  one  of  which 
claims  to  be  charged  with  the  divine  mission  of  preserving 
in  all  its  integrity  the  teaching  of  Christ  and  transmitting 
it  from  age  to  age  to  the  end  of  the  world.  Nevertheless 
it  is  evident,  as  we  shall  soon  show,  that,  among  these 
churches,  differing  so  widely  in  dogmas,  in  precepts,  and 
in  worship,  one  only  is  the  true  Church;  the  others  can  be 
only  sects,  condemned  by  Jesus  Christ,  whose  name  they 
falsely  bear. 

299 


300  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

The  proper  object  of  this  second  part  of  our  work  is  to 
enable  us  to  discern  with  certainty  the  Church  founded  by 
Christ,  to  show  that  only  the  Church  of  Rome,  which  has 
the  Pope  as  its  supreme  head,  has  a  right  to  our  belief,  our 
respect,  our  obedience,  and  our  love. 

The  order  of  this  demonstration  is  as  follows : 

Having  given  some  general  notions  of  the  Church  founded 
by  Jesus  Christ,  of  her  nature,  end,  constitution,  etc.,  we 
shall  show  that  this  Church  is  the  Roman  Catholic  Church, 
to  the  exclusion  of  all  other  Christian  communions. 

We  shall  then  speak  of  some  of  her  prerogatives,  of  her 
supreme  head,  and  of  her  relations  with  the  State.  Finally, 
we  must  defend  the  Church  against  certain  false  accusations 
made  particularly  by  historians,  and  show  what  she  has  done, 
and  never  ceases  to  do,  for  the  civilization  and  happiness 
of  nations. 

Remarks. — 1st.  We  have  no  need  to  dwell  here  upon  Chris- 
tian communions  which  have  disappeared  many  centuries 
ago,  leaving  hardly  a  trace  in  history.  St.  Augustine  enu- 
merated in  his  time  more  than  eighty-four  heresies  almost 
completely  extinct;  and  in  the  sixteenth  century  Bellarmin, 
after  mentioning  two  himdred  heresies  previous  to  Luther, 
added:  '^  All  these  sects  have  perished;  in  the  East  there  are 
a  few  Nestorians  and  Eutychians,  and  in  Bohemia  a  few 
belated  followers  of  John  Huss.''  It  is  very  evident  that 
we  have  no  need  to  revive  these  errors  long  buried  in  merited 
oblivion.  It  will  be  sufficient  to  compare  with  Catholicity 
the  churches  which  have  preserved  some  vitality,  that  is, 
certain  Protestant  sects,  and  the  schismatic  Greek  churches. 
The  triumphant  conclusion  of  this  parallel  applies  more 
forcibly  still  to  other  anti-Catholic  sects. 

2d.  In  this  treatise  the  discussion  takes,  as  we  see,  an  en- 
tirely different  ground  from  that  of  the  first  part  of  the 
work.  There  we  assumed  that  we  were  dealing  with  infidels, 
unbelievers,  and  rationalists,  who  refuse  to  acknowledge  the 
divinity  of  Christ's  mission  and  the  obligation  to  embrace 


GENERAL  NOTIONS   ABOUT  THE  CHURCH.  301 

the  religion  established  by  Him.  For  that  reason  the  only 
proofs  we  cited  were  historic  documents  and  the  truths  of 
reason.  Now  the  discussion  is  particularly  with  schismatic 
Greeks  and  those  of  our  separated  brethren,  who,  like  us, 
believe  in  the  divinity  of  Christ  and  admit  that  the  Holy 
Scripture  is  inspired.  Therefore  we  may  quote  as  decisive 
arguments  texts  of  the  Old  and  the  New  Testament  which 
we  both  regard  as  the  words  of  infallible  truth.  Even  those 
who,  unfortunately,  reject  the  authority  of  the  Scriptures 
can  receive  them  nevertheless,  as  well  as  the  writings  and 
documents  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Church,  as  historic  records 
of  incontestable  value. 

II.  The  Church. 

1.  Definition  of  the  Church. — Writers  assign  to  this 
word  ^'  church ''  (eKKXifGia^  assembly)  sometimes  a  broader 
and  sometimes  a  more  restricted  meaning.  In  the  broader 
sense  of  the  term  the  Church  is  an  assembly  which  embraces 
all  the  faithful  servants  of  God,  whether  they  are  still  com- 
bating on  earth,  or  expiating  their  faults  in  the  fires  of  pur- 
gatory, or  triumphing  in  heaven,  including  at  times  even  the 
angels.  In  the  more  restricted  sense  the  Church  is  only  an 
assembly  of  the  faithful  who  are  combating  upon  earth  (the 
Church  mihtant).  Taken  in  this  second  acceptation  the 
Church  may  include  all  the  true  adorers  of  God  from  the 
beginning  of  the  world  until  the  end  of  time;  all,  in  fact,  who 
have  beheved  or  will  beheve  in  the  revealed  religion,  essen- 
tially the  same  in  its  three  different  phases.  Nevertheless 
the  word  church  generally  designates  the  Christian  Church 
as  it  exists  in  the  world  since  Christ  came  to  give  the  final 
perfection  to  supernatural  rehgion. 

In  the  present  treatise  we  are  considering  the  Church  in 
this  last  or  more  restricted  sense.  Thus  understood  it  may 
be  defined  as  the  society  of  the  faithful  instituted  by  Christ 
to  preserve  His  doctrine,  observe  His  laws,  and  thus  attain 
the  final  end  of  man,  or  eternal  fife. 


302  christian  apologetics. 

2.  The  Christian  Religion  Constitutes  a  Real 
Society,  a  Church. — Rationalists,  we  have  seen,  do  not 
refuse  to  recognize  in  Jesus  Christ  the  ideal  type  of  human 
perfection;  but  however  pure  and  striking  His  virtue.  He  is, 
they  allege,  only  a  simple  mortal  and  the  Christian  rehgion 
is  not  His  work;  it  has  nothing  in  common  with  Him  but  the 
doctrine  which  it  professes.  But  if  this  be  true,  how  was  it 
possible  for  the  followers  of  Christ  to  form  a  society  and 
constitute  a  Church?  Here  is  the  explanation  which  they 
hazard  on  the  subject.  Christians  accustomed  to  study 
unceasingly  the  doctrine  of  this  Wise  Man,  whose  hfe  and 
teachings  they  admired,  and  being  accustomed,  moreover, 
to  indulge  in  philosophic  speculations,  and  having  become 
very  numerous,  they  were  naturally  led  to  form  a  body,  or 
society.  For  the  idea  of  Christ  and  His  doctrine  they  grad- 
ually substituted  that  of  a  society  founded  by  Him,  and  as 
they  recalled  the  ancient  glory  of  the  synagogue  they  took 
refuge  under  its  shadow  until  they  felt  sufficiently  strong  to 
separate  from  it.  Thus  certain  rationalists  insist  that  it 
was  only  in  the  second  century  that  the  Christian  Church 
dared  to  proclaim  its  existence  and  appear  in  public,  and 
that  it  was  also  at  this  period  that  the  gospels  were  written. 

This  was  the  theory  introduced  by  Strauss  in  Germany, 
and  adopted  in  France  by  Littre,  under  the  name  of  mythic 
rationalism.  Of  course  in  the  eyes  of  such  men  the  super- 
natural facts,  the  miracles  attributed  to  Christ  by  Holy 
Scripture,  are  only  myths,  figurative  impressions,  purely 
intellectual  conceptions. 

In  the  first  part  of  the  present  work  we  have  answered 
these  last  assertions  as  well  as  the  assertions  relative  to  the 
composition  of  the  gospels.  It  now  remains  for  us  to  con- 
fute the  false  assertions  in  regard  to  the  establishment  of  the 
Church  by  demonstrating  the  following  thesis.  But  let  us 
first  explain  some  of  the  terms. 

We  understand  by  the  word  society  a  collection  of  men 
uniting  their  individual  forces  for  the  attainment  of  a  common 


GENERAL   NOTIONS    ABOUT  THE   CHURCH.  303 

end  by  the  employment  of  conimon  means.  Hence  we 
find  in  every  society  four  necessary  elements:  the  mem- 
bers, their  united  efforts,  common  means,  and  a  common  end. 

The  special  nature  of  the  society  is  determined  by  the  end 
it  has  in  view.  The  end  of  domestic  society  is  different 
from  that  of  civil  society  or  that  of  religious  society.  This 
end  is  what  imites  men  into  societies  and  determines  the 
means  they  use  in  pursuit  of  their  purpose. 

One  of  the  most  indispensable  elements  of  any  society  in- 
tended to  last  is  authority;  besides  being  the  moral  bond 
wtiich  holds  the  members  together  it  presides  over  them  all, 
incites,  moderates,  directs,  and  reforms,  according  as  it  is 
necessary  for  the  good  of  all  or  the  individual.  Thus  in 
every  society  authority  is  invested  with  certain  prerogatives 
proportioned  to  the  end  to  be  attauied  by  its  subjects. 

Now  we  shall  briefly  prove  that  Jesus  f oimded  the  Christian 
society;  in  other  words,  that  He  Himself  gathered  His 
disciples  into  one  body  in  order  to  pursue  a  common  end 
(their  salvation)  by  common  means  (preaching,  worship, 
sacraments),  and  under  authority  divinely  established  (the 
heads  appointed  by  Him). 

Thesis. — Jesus   Christ   Truly   and  Personally  Founded  His 
Religion  under  the  Form  of  a  real  Society,  of  a  Church. 

We  shall  be  satisfied  here  with  merely  mentioning  the 
arguments ;  the  development  which  they  allow  belongs  rightly 
to  the  following  theses.* 

First  Argument. — ^We  learn  from  the  Gospel,  1st.  That 
Jesus  Christ  solemnly  promised  to  institute  a  Church  when 
choosing  among  His  twelve  apostles  one  to  whom  He  gave 
the  symbolic  name  of  Peter.  He  said  to  him:  ''Thou  art 
Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  My  Church;  and  the 
gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it."    This  promise 

*  Manning,  Religio  Viatoris,  ch.  iv.;  Grounds  of  Faith,  1.  2;  Schanz, 
HT.,  ch.  2,  3;  Hunter,  I.,  tr.  4,  ch.  1-3;  C.  W.  xxvi.  434,  653;  Lock- 
hart,  Old  Rel.,  ch.  ^  ff.;  Pi-Q^rd,  p.  II.,  ch.  5. 


304  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

already  furnishes  an  incontestable  proof,  for  Jesus  Christ 
could  not  fail  in  His  word. 

2d.  That  He  executed  His  promise  and  founded  this  Church. 
We  read,  in  fact,  that  He  gave  to  His  apostles  the  power  and 
mission  to  preach  the  Gospel  to  every  creature ;  to  administer 
the  sacraments;  to  govern  the  faithful;  and  that  He  prom- 
ised to  be  with  them  until  the  end  of  time.  At  the  head  of 
the  apostles  He  placed  Simon,  to  whom  He  gave  universal 
jurisdiction  over  the  whole  Church.  This  certainly  was 
founding  a  religious  society,  a  Church. 

3d.  We  learn  from  the  same  Gospel  and  the  Book  of  Acts 
that  the  apostles,  after  the  Ascension,  fulfilled  the  mission 
that  they  had  received:  they  preached  the  doctrine  of 
Christ,  they  observed  His  laws,  they  increased  from  day  to 
day  the  number  of  the  disciples  and  governed  them  under 
the  guidance  of  Peter,  who  had  been  appointed  their  su- 
preme head. 

Second  Argument.  (Of  Prescription.) — ^The  existence 
itself  of  the  Church  proves  its  Christian  origin.  Just  as  the 
secular  existence  of  a  nation,  a  civil  society,  proves  the 
reality  of  its  foundation,  so  the  existence  of  the  Church,  that 
is,  of  that  society  distinct  from  all  others,  and  which  from 
all  time  has  been  called  the  Church  of  Christ — an  existence 
uninterrupted  through  all  the  Christian  ages — proves  the 
reality  of  its  Christian  institution.  By  her  name,  her  wor- 
ship, her  temples,  her  sacraments,  her  ministers,  her  organi- 
zations, her  general  and  special  councils,  the  uninterrupted 
succession  of  her  first  pastors,  her  marvellous  institutions, 
her  moral  and  civilizing  influence,  the  Church  has  never 
ceased  for  nineteen  centuries  to  attest  that  she  was  originally 
foimded  by  Jesus  Christ.^ 

Remarks. — We  shall  find  the  preceding  argument  still 
more  convincing  if  we  weigh  the  following  reflections. 

1st.  Christianity  is  not  a  purely  abstract  conception  like 

^  C.  W.  xxxi.,  xxxii.  (Genesis  of  Cath.  Ch.),  xxxiii.,  xxxiv.  (Chris- 
tian Jerusalem). 


GENERAL   NOTIONS  ABOUT  THE   CHURCH.  305 

Platens  ideal  republic;  it  is  not  simply  a  collection  of  docu- 
ments and  moral  principles  offered  to  the  admiration  of  the 
curious,  but  a  living,  concrete  reality.  The  word  religion 
means  a  society  professing  religion,  consequently  a  Church. 
Therefore,  the  Christian  religion  and  the  Christian  Church 
are  one  and  the  same  thing;  one  is  only  the  visible  mani- 
festation of  the  other;  therefore  if  Jesus  founded  His  relig- 
ion He  founded  His  Church,  that  is,  the  visible  society  of 
those  who  profess  His  doctrine.^ 

2d.  The  proofs  by  which  we  have  established  the  divinity 
of  the  Christian  religion  apply,  the  greater  part  of  them, 
directly  to  the  Church.  Thus  it  was  Christianity,  not  in  the 
abstract,  but  as  forming  a  society,  a  Church,  which  was  pre- 
dicted and  prescribed  by  the  oracles  and  the  prophets;  it 
was  the  establishment  of  the  Church  which  was  marked  by 
the  seal  of  miracles;  it  was  her  divine  origin  which  was 
attested  by  the  blood  of  martyrs,  which  was  miraculously 
established  and  preserved,  and  which  produced  the  most 
marvellous  fruits  of  virtue  in  souls  and  the  richest  blessings 
to  mankind. 

Corollary.  The  obligation  of  being  a  member  of  the 
Church  in  order  to  be  saved.  ^ — This  obligation  readily  follows 
from  the  preceding  thesis.  There  are  societies  which  are 
voluntary  and  optional;  except  in  special  circumstances  no 
one  is  obliged  to  enter  them;  if  we  assume  their  obligations, 
it  is  to  enjoy  the  advantages  which  they  afford.  Such  are 
financial  societies,  such  also  are  religious  orders.  If  after 
we  have  entered  societies  of  this  kind  we  are  obliged  to 
remain,  it  is  because  we  cannot  leave  them  without  violating 
the  vows  which  we  have  voluntarily  taken. 

It  is  quite  otherwise  with  the  religious  society,  the  Church. 

*  Br.  W.  xii.  59;  J.  L.  Spalding,  Lectures,  I.  10. 

^  Dr.  Edw.  Hawarden,  Charity  and  Truth;  Hay,  Sincere  Christian, 
vol.  ii.,  append.;  Schanz,  IH.,  ch.  9;  Ryder  (C.  T.  S.  vol.  v.);  Balmes, 
Letters  to  a  Sceptic,  1.  16;  Br.  W.  v.  571;  C.  W.  xxxi.  481,  xlvii. 
145,  xlviii.  509;  M.  Ivii.  363,  Ixxiii.  236,  344, 


306  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

It  is  a  strict  obligation  for  every  man  to  enter  it,  for,  as  we 
have  already  seen,  every  man  is  obliged  to  enter  the  super- 
natural order,  and  this  order  is  attained  through  the  Church  of 
Christ.  We  have,  moreover,  the  formal  command  of  Jesus 
Christ,  the  Founder  of  the  Church:  "Go  preach  the  Gospel 
to  all  nations,  baptizing  them.  ...  He  that  will  not  be- 
lieve shall  be  condemned."  This  was  always  Catholic  belief, 
the  doctrine  of  the  Fathers  and  of  the  Councils.  ''Faith 
teaches  us,"  says  Pius  IX.,  "that  outside  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic Apostolic  Church  there  is  no  salvation ;  it  is  the  only  ark 
of  salvation,  and  whosoever  will  not  enter  it  will  be  the 
victim  of  the  deluge."  Let  us  add  here  a  remark  which  we 
shall  develop  more  fully  later:  they  who,  through  no  fault 
of  their  own,  are  ignorant  of  the  existence  of  the  true  Church 
and  the  obligation  to  form  a  part  thereof,  are  not  punished 
for  not  entering  it.  We  shall  state  in  its  proper  place  the 
conditions  under  which  such  persons  may  form  part  of 
the  soul  of  the  Church  and  enter  heaven  (ch.  4,  art.  1,  iv.). 

3.  The  End  of  the  Church. — The  proper  and  direct  end 
of  the  Church  founded  by  Jesus  Christ,  or  the  end  which  He 
proposed  in  instituting  the  Church,  was  to  save  souls  and 
to  lead  men  to  eternal  salvation.  Nothing  is  more  evident 
than  this  in  the  gospels  and  throughout  the  New  Testament. 
Moreover,  the  Church,  as  history  proves,  has  never,  either 
in  theory  or  practice,  claimed  any  other  end.  She  has, 
indeed,  contributed  to  the  welfare  of  individuals  and  of 
governments;  but  this  was  an  indirect  though  natural  effect 
of  her  teachings. 

Considering  this  supernatural  end,  the  Church  may  be 
said  to  be  a  supernatural  society,  a  society  of  souls,  though 
it  is  no  less  true  that  she  is  a  visible  and  corporal  society. 
In  fact  when  she  speaks  to  the  soul  it  is  through  the  organs 
of  the  body;  the  means  she  employs,  preaching  and  sacra- 
ments, are  corporal  and  sensible  means;  the  authority 
which  governs  her  is  a  physical  and  tangible  authority. 


GENERAL   NOTIONS   ABOUT   THE   CHURCH.  307 

This  shows  the  absurdity  of  the  following  sophism  of  certain 
Protestants.  The  Church,  they  argue,  is  a  society  of  souls; 
hence  she  is  wholly  spiritual;  therefore  they  must  reject 
the  Church  of  Rome,  because  she  has  a  Pope,  bishops,  sacra- 
ments, and  religious  ceremonies. 

4.  Constitution  of  the  Church,  or  Ecclesiastical 
Hierarchy. — In  every  State  or  civil  society  there  are  two 
orders  of  citizens,  those  who  command  and  those  who  obey. 
Similarly,  in  the  Church  or  society  founded  by  Jesus  Christ 
there  are  two  constituent  elements,  those  who  teach  and 
command,  those  who  hear  and  obey.  The  first  constitute 
the  teaching  Church — they  are  called  the  pastors,  the  ministry, 
the  hierarchy;  the  second  constitute  that  portion  of  the 
Church  who  are  taught — they  are  called  the  faithful  or  laity, 
the  fold  or  flock. 

We  distinguish,  generally,  three  forms  of  government: 
monarchical,  aristocratic,  and  republican.  The  form  of  gov- 
ernment imposed  upon  the  Church  by  her  divine  Founder 
is  monarchical.  In  fact  Peter,  as  we  shall  prove  later,  was 
invested  with  the  primacy,  that  is,  with  supreme  power, 
which  he  was  to  transmit  to  his  successors.  But  just  as  in 
civil  monarchy  there  must  be  heads  of  provinces,  chiefs 
or  governors  subordinate  to  the  ruling  power  or  sovereign, 
so  in  the  ecclesiastical  monarchy  there  is  one  supreme  head 
who  is  the  Pope,  the  Vicar  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  in  the  various 
dioceses  subordinate  heads  who  are  bishops.  The  Church 
therefore  is,  by  divine  right,  a  monarchy,  wisely  seconded  by 
a  sort  of  subordinate  aristocracy.^ 

Hence  the  folly  of  our  separated  brethren,  the  majority  of 
whom  claim  that  the  Church  is  a  society  where  all  are  equal ; 
that  the  ecclesiastical  power  is  vested  in  the  multitude  of 
the  faithful;  that  as  the  faithful,  en  masse,  cannot  profit- 
ably exercise  this  power,  deputies  or  delegates  must  be  chosen 
to  act  for  them;  but  the  people,  they  claim,  have  always 
the  right  to  choose  these  deputies,  to  limit  their  power,  and 

*  Br.  W.  viii.  527,  xii.  79 ;  Lacordaire;  conf.  2  on  the  Church, 


308  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

to  depose  them  when  they  think  proper.  It  is  clearly  evi- 
dent from  simply  reading  the  Gospel  that  such  a  system  is 
absolutely  contrary  to  the  will  of  the  divine  Founder  of 
the  Church.     This  will  be  clearly  demonstrated  farther  on. 

5.  The  Church  is  a  Perfect  Society.^ — A  society  to  be 
complete  or  perfect  must  possess  in  itself  all  the  means 
necessary  for  attaining  its  end.  Such,  for  example,  is  civil 
society.  A  society  to  be  perfect,  1st,  must  be  independent 
and  form  no  part  of  any  other  society.  Thus  a  financial 
society  which  forms  a  part  of  the  state  or  government  is  an 
incomplete  society.  2d.  It  must  have  no  end  directly  sub- 
ordinate to  that  of  any  other  society:  the  end  of  military 
societies,  or  armies,  is  evidently  subordinate  to  the  good  of 
civil  society.  3d.  It  must  possess  in  itself  all  the  means 
necessary  for  its  subsistence,  its  preservation,  and  the  ac- 
complishment of  its  end. 

Now  it  is  God's  will  that  the  Church  possess  all  these 
conditions.  1st.  She  forms  no  constituent  part  of  any  other 
society.  2d.  Her  end,  so  far  from  being  subordinate,  is 
incomparably  superior  to  that  of  all  other  societies;  more- 
over, every  well-ordered  society  must  ultimately  be  sub- 
servient to  the  end  of  the  Church,  which  is  the  supreme  end 
of  man,  eternal  salvation.  3d.  Finally,  in  virtue  of  her 
constitution  and  the  assistance  of  divine  grace,  which  she 
never  lacks,  the  Church  has  every  means  of  attaining  her 
end.  Hence  she  is,  as  we  shall  prove  later  on,  a  perfect 
society. 

^  See  references  below  to  ch.  3,  art.  4.  "The  Church  was  founded 
by  her  divine  Author  as  a  true  and  perfect  society,  not  confined 
within  any  territorial  limits,  nor  subject  to  any  civil  government, 
but  free  in  the  exercise  of  her  power  and  rights  all  over  the  world." 
Pius  IX.,  Allocut.  Dec.  17, 1860.  The  Church  "is  distinguished,  and 
differs,  from  civil  society;  and  what  is  of  highest  moment,  it  is  a 
society  chartered  as  of  right  divine,  perfect  in  its  nature  and  in  its 
title,  to  possess  in  itself  and  by  itself,  through  the  will  and  loving 
kindness  of  its  Founder,  all  needful  provision  for  its  maintenance  and 
action."     Leo  XHL,  Encycl.  on  Christian  Const,  of  States. 


GENEKAL   NOTIONS   ABOUT   THE    CHURCH.  309 

For  the  rest,  a  short  glance  at  history  may  convince  us 
of  the  fact.  During  the  first  three  centuries  the  Church 
never  ceased  to  pursue  her  end,  the  sanctification  of  souls. 
She  spread  and  asserted  herself  among  the  nations  not  only 
without  any  help  or  assistance  from  the  civil  power,  but 
in  spite  of  the  most  cruel  persecutions  on  the  part  of  this 
same  power. ^  Besides,  how  could  the  Church,  being  a  society 
of  a  supernatural  order,  receive  from  any  purely  natural 
society  the  means  required  to  attain  her  end?  Supernatural 
means  alone  bear  the  right  proportion  to  the  attainment  of 
an  end  which  is  eminently  supernatural,  namely,  the  eternal 
salvation  of  souls. 

^  "The  Catholic  Church  has  its  charter  directly  from  God,  it  came 
immediately  out  of  the  hands  of  God,  not  through  princes  nor  through 
people.  It  was  first  established  when  all  princes  and,  we  may  say, 
all  nations  were  against  it.  This  circumstance  was  providential, 
not  only  inasmuch  as  it  served  to  show  the  power  of  God,  .  .  .  but 
also  because  the  Church  in  its  origin  neither  required,  nor  received, 
nor  waited  for  any  consent  from  existing  political  states."  O'Reilly, 
S.J.,  p.  24.    See  also  his  excellent  remarks  p.  154  ff.  '. 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  IS  THE  TRUE  CHURCH  OF  JESUS 

CHRIST.' 

In  the  preceding  chapter  we  have  seen  that  Jesus  Christ 
founded  a  Church  of  which  every  one  is  obhged  to  be  a 
member  under  pain  of  faihng  to  reaUze  his  last  end.  We 
must  now  enter  upon  the  capital  question  of  this  second 
part,  that  is,  determine  which  among  the  Christian  societies 
we  have  before  us  was  truly  founded  by  Jesus  Christ,  pre- 
serves His  doctrine  in  all  its  purity,  and  represents  Him  upon 
earth.  In  a  matter  where  any  mistake  involves  such  de- 
plorable consequences  to  our  souls  we  cannot  take  too  much 
precaution  to  discern  the  false  from  the  true. 

Outside  of  the  Catholic  Church  we  find  in  the  bosom  of 
Christianity  two  great  reUgious  divisions  claiming  to  be 
the  true' religion  of  Christ:  heresy  and  schism.  Heresy  is  a 
Christian  sect  which  rejects  one  part  of  the  Christian  dogma 
formerly  universally  admitted,  and  retains  another  part. 
Schism  is  the  separating  of  a  religious  body  from  the  central 
government  formerly  universally  acknowledged,  and  the  con- 
stituting itself  a  special  centre  and  separate  government. 

We  shall  first  set  forth  the  distinct  marks  or  notes  by 
which  the  true  Church  of  Christ  may  be  recognized  among 

*  Spalding,  J.  M.,  Evidences,  etc.;  Allnat,  The  Church  and  the  Sects; 
Schanz,  III.;  Gibbons,  Faith  of  our  Fathers;  Lindsay,  De  Ecclesia, 
etc.;  Gildea,  in  C.  T.  S.  xvi.;  Preston,  Protestantism  and  the  Church; 
Moriarty,  The  Keys  of  Heaven;  Ricards,  Cath.  Christianity;  Bag- 
shawe,  Credentials  of  the  Church;  Br.  W.  viii.  552;  Hunter,  I.,  tr.  4; 
McLauglilin,  Divine  Plan;  Van  den  Hagen,  Where  is  the  True  Church?; 
Cox,  The  Pillar  and  Ground  of  Truth. 

310 


THE  CHURCH  OP  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       311 

the  various  Christian  communions,  and  show  that  the  Catho- 
Uc  or  Roman  Church,  who  has  as  head  the  Roman  Pontiff, 
possesses  all  these  notes.  We  shall  then  prove  that  all  other 
Christian  commimions  (Protestant  or  schismatic)  lack  these 
marks,  although  this  last  proof  is  not  indispensable.  The 
divinity  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  involves  of  itself 
the  illegitimacy  of  all  sects.  Lastly,  in  the  Primacy  of  St. 
Peter  we  shall  discover  a  new  mark  by  which  the  exclusive 
truth  of  the  Church  of  Rome  may  be  readily  recognized. 


ART.  I.— NOTES  OF  THE  TRUE  CHURCH  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 

The  true  religion,  binding  upon  all  men,  exists  only  in  the 
Church  founded  by  Jesus  Christ.  God  wills  the  salvation  of 
all,  hence  it  is  absolutely  necessary  that  all  be  able  to  discern 
the  true  Church  of  Christ  among  the  various  religious  societies 
claiming  Him  as  founder.*  The  notes  of  which  we  are  about 
to  treat  will  enable  us  to  make  this  indispensable  discovery. 

I,  Of  the  Notes  in  General. 

Definition. — We  call  notes  of  the  Church  sensible  and 
permanent  characters  proper  to  her,  by  means  of  which  the 
true  Church  may  be  readily  and  unerringly  recognized  by  all 
men.    Let  us  explain  this  definition  in  detail. 

1st.  Sensible  characters^  that  is,  characters  exteriorly  per- 
ceptible (visible).  It  is  evident  that  qualities  which,  though 
real,  are  not  patent  to  our  eyes  cannot  help  us  to  discern 
the  true  Church.^ 

2d.  Special  characters  proper  to  the  Church.  As  the  cele- 
brated Bellarmin  says:    ''If  I  wish  to  describe  a  man  whom 

'  Spalding,  Evid.,  1.  6;  Hunter,  1.  c,  ch.  9;  Br.  W.  v.  476.  A  rich 
collection  of  testimonies  from  the  Fathers  on  the  Marks  of  the  Church 
is  found  in  the  excellent  work  "The  Faith  of  Catholics,"  vol.  i. 

2 "  Though  the  Church  possesses  many  properties,  not  all  of  these 
are  marks  in  the  technical  sense  of  the  word."     Scheeben,  II.,  p.  341. 


812  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

you  have  never  seen,  and  enable  you  to  recognize  him 
immediately  at  sight,  I  should  not  say  he  has  two  hands, 
two  ears,  for  these  things  are  common  to  all  men." 

3d.  Permanent  characters,  that  is,  those  which  continue 
throughout  all  ages  in  the  Church.  This  is  an  immediate 
consequence  of  what  we  have  just  said.  If  it  never  ceases 
to  be  a  strict  obligation  for  all  men  to  enter  the  Church,  the 
only  way  of  salvation,  it  is  sovereignly  important  to  be  able 
always  and  at  all  times  to  recognize  this  way  of  salvation; 
hence  the  characters  which  guide  us  must  be  constant  and 
permanent. 

4th.  Means  by  which  the  true  Church  may  he  readily  and 
unerringly  recognized  by  all  men.  In  fact  it  was  for  this  end 
that  God  willed  that  His  Church  should  be  invested  with 
these  characters.  Now  as  all,  the  ignorant  as  well  as  the 
learned,  are  obliged  to  enter  this  ark  of  salvation,  and  as  the 
greater  part  of  mankind  is  incapable  of  laborious  examination 
or  profound  study,  God  mercifully  provides  in  these  notes 
an  easy  guide  for  all  in  search  of  truth. ^  At  the  same  time 
the  conviction  which  the  notes  afford  varies  according  to  the 
penetration  of  each  mind.  But  the  conviction  of  the  scholar, 
though  more  enlightened  and  the  result  of  deeper  reflection, 
is  essentially  of  the  same  nature  as  that  of  ordinary  minds. 

Remark. — It  follows  from  what  we  have  just  said  that 
among  the  characters  necessary  to  the  Church  there  are 
some  which  can  in  no  way  serve  as  notes ;  such  are  indef ecti- 

^  "  It  is  plain  that  if  the  Church  is  to  be  an  available  guide  to  poor 
as  well  as  rich,  unlearned  as  well  as  learned,  its  notes  and  tokens  must 
be  very  simple,  obvious,  and  intelligible.  They  must  not  depend  on 
education  or  be  brought  out  by  abstruse  reasoning,  but  must  at  once 
affect  the  imagination  and  interest  the  feelings.  They  must  bear 
with  them  a  sort  of  internal  evidence  which  supersedes  further  dis- 
cussion and  makes  the  truth  self-evident."  These  evidences  of  the 
Church  need  not  be  "such  as  cannot  possibly  be  explained  away 
or  put  out  of  sight,  but  such  as,  if  allowed  room  to  display  themselves, 
will  persuade  the  many  that  she  is  what  she  professes  to  be,  God's 
ordained  teacher  in  attaining  heaven."     (Newman,  Essays,  I.,  n.  4.) 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       313 

bility  and  infallibility,  for  the  reason  that  they  are  not 
exterior,  palpable  characters  more  easily  recognized  than 
the  Church  itself.  On  the  contrary,  it  is  only  after  we  have 
discerned  the  true  Church  that  we  recognize  its  indispensable 
quaUties  of  infallibility  and  indefectibility. 

II.  Division  of  the  Notes. 

All  the  notes  of  the  Church  are  real  properties  and  positive 
characters;  yet  we  divide  them  according  to  their  demonstra- 
tive value  into  positive  and  negative  notes.  The  negative 
notes  (if  they  can  be  called  notes)  are  those  the  absence  of 
which  proves  efficaciously  that  a  society  is  not  the  Church 
of  Christ,  but  the  presence  of  which  does  not  of  itself  prove 
the  true  Church.  Let  us  cite  for  example  certain  notes 
generally  mentioned  by  Protestants:  perfect  integrity  of 
doctrine,  loyalty  of  preachers,  legitimate  use  of  the  sacra- 
ments, just  and  peaceful  means  of  propagation.  These 
characters  are  doubtless  indispensable  to  the  true  Church; 
but  while  they  may  exist,  at  least  in  theory,  for  a  time  in  a 
dissenting  sect,  they  are  as  difficult  to  recognize  as  the  Church 
itself.  The  positive  notes  have  quite  a  different  value ;  they 
belong  exclusively  to  the  true  Church  of  Christ.  Once  we 
prove  their  existence  in  a  religious  society  we  are  authorized 
to  conclude  that  this  society  is  the  true  Church. 

Apologists  differ  in  their  enumeration  of  negative  as  well 
as  positive  notes.  We  shall  speak  only  of  the  four  positive 
notes  generally  admitted,  and  enumerated  in  the  Creed  of 
Nica^a  or  Constantinople  inserted  in  the  liturgy  of  the  Mass: 
Unity,  Sanctity,  Catholicity,  and  Apostolicity. 

III.  Positive  Notes. 

A.  Unity, 

This  unity  is  twofold:  it  includes,  1st,  unity  of  doctrine 
and  of  faith,  which  consists  in  the  universal  assent  of  the  faith- 
ful to  all  that  the  Church  teaches  as  revealed  by  Jesus  Christ. 


314  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

2d.  Unity  of  ministry  and  of  communion ;  that  is,  the  union 
of  all  the  faithful  by  participation  in  the  same  sacraments  and 
in  the  celebration  of  the  same  worship  under  the  guidance  of 
their  bishops,  and  particularly  of  the  Roman  Pontiff. 

To  disturb  the  unity  of  faith  by  rejecting  a  point  of  doc- 
trine is  heresy ;  to  disturb  the  unity  of  communion  by  re- 
jecting the  authority  of  lawful  heads  is  schism} 

I.    UNITY    OF   DOCTRINE    AND    BELIEF. 

Thesis. — Jesus  Christ  willed  that  His  Church  should  he  one 

in  Doctrine  and  Belief  ;  that  is,  He  made  it  an  Obligation  for 

Pastors  to  Teach,  and  consequently  for  the  Faithful  to  Believe, 

Unreservedly,  all  the  Truths  revealed  by  Him. 

First  Argument,  derived  from  Holy  Scripture. — 
a.  ''Go,"  Jesus  said  to  His  apostles,  ''and  teach  ye  all  nations, 
baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things 
whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you."  Christ,  we  see,  makes 
no  exception;  His  very  words  make  exception  impossible: 
"  You  will  teach  them  to  observe  omnia  quaecumque  mandavi, 
all  things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you;"  He  imposed, 
consequently,  faith  in  all  His  doctrines  no  less  than  in  all  His 
precepts.  Again  He  says:  "Preach  the  Gospel  to  every  crea- 
ture: he  that  belie veth  and  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved;  but 
he  that  believeth  not  shall  be  condemned"  (Markxvi.  15, 16). 
If  it  were  sufficient  to  believe  only  certain  truths,  and  we  were 
free  to  believe  or  not  to  believe  others,  Jesus  certainly  would 
have  declared  those  that  were  of  obligation,  since  we  are 
obliged  to  accept  them  under  pain  of  eternal  loss.  Nor  does 
Jesus  make  any  exception  when  He  says;  "He  that  heareth 
you  heareth  Me,  and  he  that  despiseth  you  despiseth  Me." 
And  again:  "He  that  will  not  hear  the  Church,  let  him  be 

^  On  Schism  consult  Harper,  I.,  essay  2,  §6;  Hunter,  I.,  n.  216; 
M.  Ixxxii.  1;  Br.  W.  iv.  573;  Botalla,  Papacy  and  Schism;  Lockhart, 
Old  Rel.,  ch.  15,  30,  31. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH,       315 

to  thee  as  a  heathen  and  as  a  pubUcan^'  (Luke  x.  16;  Matt, 
xviii.  17). 

b.  The  language  of  the  apostles  is  the  same  as  that  of 
their  Master.  We  do  not  find  in  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  any- 
thing intimating  the  slightest  distinction  between  dogma 
and  dogma,  between  truth  and  truth;  he  announces  the 
doctrine  of  Christ,  nothing  less,  nothing  more.  He  pro- 
nounces anathema  upon  any  one  who  would  preach  anything 
else,  were  it  even  he  himself,  or  an  angel  from  heaven.  He 
conjures  the  Romans  to  avoid  those  who  cause  dissensions 
and  offences  contrary  to  the  doctrine  they  have  learned. 
He  beseeches  the  Galatians  to  do  the  same,  and  to  avoid 
schisms  and  heresies  without  distinction,  under  pain  of 
damnation.  St.  John  speaks  in  the  same  manner;  according 
to  him,  whoever  remains  not  in  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  but 
rejects  it,  does  not  possess  God:  ''If  any  man  come  to  you 
and  bring  not  this  doctrine,  receive  him  not  into  the  house, 
nor  say  to  him,  God  speed  you"  (2  John  i.  10). 

Second  Argument,  derived  from  the  Teaching  of  the 
Early  Fathers  and  Councils  of  the  Church. — a.  Pressed 
by  the  irresistible  arguments  of  Catholic  theologians,  the 
French  Calvinist  Jurieu,  in  the  seventeenth  century,  intro- 
duced into  the  doctrine  of  Jesus  Christ  a  distinction  hitherto 
absolutely  unknown,  viz.,  fimdamental  articles  which  we  are 
obliged  to  believe,  and  non-fundamental  articles  which  we 
are  free  to  reject.  He  claimed  that  this  distinction  was 
generally  admitted  during  the  first  four  centuries  of  the 
Church,  and  that  it  was  only  in  the  fifth  century  that  it 
was  rejected  and  the  faithful  thenceforth  obliged  to  believe 
all  the  dogmas  revealed  by  Jesus  Christ.  ^      It  is  very  evi- 

*We  do  not  think  it  necessary  to  refute  at  great  length  this  dis- 
tinction invented  for  the  needs  of  a  desperate  cause  and  eagerly 
adopted  by  the  Protestants  of  that  day.  It  can  be  easily  demon- 
strated that  this  system,  which  has,  moreover,  been  generally  aban- 
doned, is  contrary  to  the  Holy  Scriptures  upon  which  Protestants 
claim  to  rely  exclusively;  that  it  destroys  the  authority  of  Jesus 
Christ;  that  it  is  contrary  to  the  belief  of  all  Christians  prior  to  the 


316  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

dent  that  if  such  a  change  had  taken  place  then,  it  would 
have  drawn  forth  innumerable  protests  from  the  bishops 
and  Fathers  of  the  Church,  as  well  as  from  the  faithful  and 
from  heretics.  The  innumerable  Councils,  general  or  special, 
convened  to  decide  questions  of  dogma  attest  the  vigilance 
employed  at  that  time  to  preserve  the  doctrine  in  all  its 
purity  and  integrity.  Moreover,  contemporaneous  history, 
which  relates  in  minutest  detail  the  smallest  heresies,  makes 
no  mention  of  any  protest  or  charge  of  this  nature.  And 
what  is  more,  no  Catholic  or  heretic,  or  even  Protestant, 
before  Jurieu,  was  aware  of  such  an  innovation,  nor  did 
any  one  ever  think  of  reproaching  the  Church  with  such  a 
departure.  As  a  matter  of  fact  the  Church  has  never  varied 
on  this  point,  and  consequently  all  tradition  condemns  the 
theory. 

h.  Moreover,  it  is  absolutely  false  that  the  Fathers  and 
Popes  of  the  first  four  centuries  taught  the  distinction,  which 
was  the  tardy  invention  of  Jurieu's  imagination.  On  the 
contrary,  when  they  treated  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Church 
and  the  obligation  of  accepting  it,  they  employed  universal 
terms  which  imply  no  restriction.  They  insist  that  what 
is  to  be  taught  and  to  be  believed  is  the  doctrine  of  Christ; 
that  he  who  teaches  anything  else  is  a  heretic;  that  he  who 
believes  otherwise  shares  in  his  heresy;    and  that  they  are 

seventeenth  century:  finally,  that  it  is  arbitrary  and  impracticable. 
How  will  Protestants  determine  which  are  fundamental  articles, 
recognizing,  as  they  do,  no  other  rule  of  interpreting  the  word  of 
God  than  private  judgment  and  individual  reason?  If,  according  to 
Jurieu,  the  safest  rule  is  to  admit  as  fundamental  and  necessary 
for  salvation  only  what  all  Christians  have  believed  unanimously 
and  still  believe  all  over  the  world,  there  are  absolutely  no  more 
fundamental  doctrines  left  in  matters  of  religion.  Is  there  any  one 
dogma  which  has  not  been  rejected  by  heretics?  Moreover,  this  sys- 
tem tells  against  Protestants  themselves,  and  condemns  their  separa- 
tion from  the  Catholic  Church.  In  fact,  since  this  Church  has  always 
held  and  still  holds  articles  which  they  declare  fundamental,  what 
reason  have  they  for  separating  from  her  ?  * 

♦Br.  W.  vi.  269;  Hunter,  I.,  n.  219. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.        317 

both  excluded  from  the  Church  and  from  salvation.  The 
Fathers  and  bishops,  even  outside  the  Councils,  who  have 
taught  this,  are  very  numerous.  Cardinal  Gousset  in  his 
Dogmatic  Theology  reproduces  the  testimony  of  twenty-one, 
from  St.  Ignatius  of  Antioch  and  St.  Polycarp  of  Smyrna, 
disciples  of  the  apostles,  to  St.  Basil,  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen, 
and  St.  Ambrose,  all  of  whom  lived  before  the  fifth  century. 
Third  Argument,  derived  from  Reason. — Common  sense 
itself  enables  us  to  recognize  that  it  cannot  be  a  matter  of 
equal  indifference  whether  we  believe  that  there  are  seven 
sacraments  or  that  there  are  less ;  that  confession  is  necessary 
for  the  remission  of  sin  or  that  it  is  optional;  that  Jesus 
Christ  is  really  or  only  figuratively  present  in  the  Eucharist. 
No  one  would  venture  to  affirm  that  he  who  adores  the 
consecrated  Host  and  he  who  tramples  it  under  foot  are 
equally  pleasing  to  God  and  true  disciples  of  Jesus  Christ; 
that  it  is  equally  allowable  to  believe  that  faith  without 
works  is  sufficient  for  salvation,  and  that  faith  without  works 
is  dead  and  of  no  avail  for  salvation.  Religions  professing 
doctrines  so  opposite  cannot  be  one  and  the  same  religion, 
teaching  the  one  and  indivisible  doctrine  of  Christ.  Yet 
this,  notwithstanding  it  is  so  manifestly  contrary  to  good 
sense,  is  what  our  opponents  advance. 

II.    UNITY   OF   ministry  OR   GOVERNMENT. 

Remarks. — 1st.  We  have  here  a  question  of  fact:  Did 
Jesus  Christ  confide  to  the  Pope  and  the  bishops,  and  to 
no  others,  not  only  the  ministry  of  the  word  which  preserves 
the  unity  of  faith,  but  also  the  ministry  of  the  sacraments, 
the  regulation  of  worship  and  of  all  the  details  of  religious 
government,  from  which  arises  the  unity  of  communion? 

2d.  Protestants  recognize,  it  is  true,  the  existence  of  a 
certain  ministry  in  the  Church  of  Christ;  but  with  them 
this  ministry  has  no  authority  to  bind  the  conscience  of  the 
faithful.  In  fact  they  claim  for  every  individual  Christian 
the  right  to  pronounce  final  judgment  in  religious  questions, 


318  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

and  to  decide  what  he  must  beheve  and  what  he  may  reject. 
Nor  is  this  ministry,  they  claim,  hmited  only  to  bishops 
united  with,  and  subordinate  to  the  Roman  Pontiff,  but  it  is 
legitimately  exercised  by  every  pastor  whom  the  people  are 
pleased  to  recognize,  on  condition,  however,  that  the  pastor 
in  preaching,  and  in  the  administration  of  the  sacraments, 
does  not  reject  any  of  their  fundamental  articles. 

3d.  As  to  the  Greek  schismatics,  they  deny  the  primacy  of 
jurisdiction  of  the  Pope  of  Rome  in  the  exercise  of  the  minis- 
try and,  consequently,  the  obligation  on  the  part  of  the 
bishops  and  their  flocks  to  form  part  of  the  Roman  com- 
munion. 

Thesis. — Jesus  Christ  has  Established  in  the  Church  an  Au- 
thority which  He  Confided  to  the  Apostles  and  to  which  all  the 
Faithful  must  Submit;  consequently  whosoever  Separates 
Himself  from  their  Ministry  is  Guilty  of  Schism  and  thereby 
Excluded  from  the  Church. 

FiHST  Argument,  from  the  Scriptures. — a.  Jesus  declares 
that  He  sends  His  apostles  as  His  Father  hath  sent  Him. 
He  orders  them  to  preach  the  Gospel,  to  administer  baptism, 
and  to  teach  all  that  He  taught  them,  promising  to  be  mth 
them  until  the  consummation  of  the  world.  He  makes 
Peter  the  supreme  head  and  the  foundation  of  His  Church; 
He  gives  him  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  and  de- 
clares that  all  that  Peter  shall  decide  in  the  exercise  of  his 
ministry  shall  be  ratified  in  heaven ;  He  orders  him  to  feed 
His  lambs  and  His  sheep,  that  is,  the  whole  flock,  which  is 
the  Church. 

Again,  Jesus,  speaking  one  day  to  His  apostles  and  the 
disciples  whom  He  associated  with  them,  gave  them  practi- 
cal lessons  of  great  importance,  among  which  is  one  which 
has  immediate  reference  to  the  present  question.  ''If  thy 
brother  shall  offend  against  thee,  go  and  rebuke  him  between 
thee  and  him  alone;  if  he  shall  hear  thee,  thou  shalt  gain 
thy  brother;   and  if  he  mil  not  hear  thee,  take  with  thee 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       319 

one  or  two  more,  that  in  the  mouth  of  two  or  three  witnesses 
every  word  may  stand.  And  if  he  will  not  hear  them,  tell  the 
Church ;  and  if  he  will  not  hear  the  Church,  let  him  be  to 
thee  as  the  heathen  and  publican."  (Matth.  xviii.  15, 16,  17.) 
The  witnesses  of  whom  Jesus  speaks  here  are  not  to  be 
called  to  pronounce  sentence,  but  simply  to  sustain  by  their 
presence  the  protest  of  the  one  demanding  redress.  And 
though  He  adds,  "  tell  the  Church,"  Jesus  does  not  mean  a 
union  of  the  faithful,  but  of  the  heads  established  in  the 
Church  to  settle  such  questions.  Thus  nowhere  do  we 
find,  either  in  the  Scriptures  or  in  the  ecclesiastical  history  of 
the  first  ages,  that  the  faithful  were  ever  convened  in  coun- 
cil to  decide  questions  of  this  nature.  Moreover,  the  words 
of  the  Master  which  immediately  follow  those  we  have  just 
cited  exclude  all  doubt  in  this  matter:  ''Amen  I  say  to  you, 
whatsoever  you  shall  bind  upon  earth  shall  be  bound  also  in 
heaven ;  and  whatsoever  you  shall  loose  upon  earth  shall  be 
loosed  also  in  heaven."  It  is  evident  that  these  words, 
which  He  had  already  addressed  to  Peter  alone,  referred, 
not  to  the  congregation  of  the  faithful,  but  to  those  in  whom 
He  had  vested  His  authority,  and  associated  with  Peter  in 
the  government  of  His  Church.  Now  the  question  here 
is  not  a  question  of  faith,  but  simply  of  spiritual  direction, 
the  reparation  of  an  injury  committed  by  one  brother  against 
another.  Jesus  nevertheless  says  very  clearly  that  if  the 
guilty  one  refuse  to  submit,  he  must  be  considered  as  a  heathen 
and  a  publican,  that  is,  as  no  longer  forming  a  part  of  His 
Church. 

Hence  there  exists  in  the  Church  a  ministry  not  only  for 
preaching,  but  for  government;  and  this  ministry  is  con- 
fided only  to  the  heads  estabhshed  by  Jesus  Christ,  whom 
the  faithful  are  obUged  to  obey  under  pain  of  being  cut  off 
from  the  body  of  the  faithful. 

h.  The  same  ministry  is  affirmed  by  the  Apostle  St.  Paul 
in  several  of  his  epistles.  He  tells  the  Ephesians  that  God 
has  appointed  ''some  apostles,  and  some  prophets,  and  other 


320  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

some  evangelists,  and  other  some  pastors  and  doctors,  for 
the  perfecting  of  the  saints,  for  the  work  of  the  ministry, 
for  the  edifying  of  the  body  of  Christ  until  we  all  meet  into 
the  unity  of  faith,  and  of  the  knowledge  of  the  Son  of  God; 
.  .  .  that  henceforth  we  be  no  more  children  tossed  to  and 
fro  and  carried  about  with  every  wind  of  doctrine. '^  He 
preaches  to  the  Galatians  union,  concord,  and  obedience, 
ranking  schisms,  which  he  calls  sects,  with  the  works  of  the 
flesh  which  exclude  men  from  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  Else- 
where he  orders  the  bishops,  whom  the  Holy  Spirit,  he  says, 
hath  appointed  to  govern  the  Church  of  Christ,  to  take  heed 
to  themselves  and  their  flocks;  for  he  knows  that  after  his 
departure  ravening  wolves  will  steal  among  them  and  will 
not  spare  the  flock,  and  men  will  arise  among  them  who  will 
pervert  doctrine,  and  draw  disciples  after  them.  (Eph.  iv. ; 
Gal.  \d.  20;  Acts  xx.  28.) 

Here,  certainly,  is  a  ministry  clearly  defined  as  to  its 
origin,  which  is  the  will  of  God;  as  to  its  depositaries,  who 
are  the  heads  of  the  Church;  as  to  its  object,  which  is  the 
government  of  the  faithful.  Now  if  the  faithful  were  not 
bound  to  submit  to  this  ministry,  why  does  it  exist,  and  why 
should  refusal  to  recognize  and  submit  to  it  exclude  us  from 
the  kingdom  of  heaven? 

Second  Argument,  derived  from  the  Teaching  of  the 
Fathers  in  the  First  Ages. — Pope  St.  Clement,  who  was 
the  disciple  and  companion  of  the  great  Apostle,  wrote  the 
Corintliians  an  admirable  letter  to  suppress  a  schism  which 
had  broken  out  at  Corinth.  The  letter  was  of  such  excep- 
tional authority  that  for  a  long  time  in  the  Churches  of 
the  East  it  was  read  with  the  Holy  Scriptures.  It  ought 
to  be  quoted  entire,  but  we  cannot  do  more  than  give  a 
summary  of  it.  He  calls  the  dissension  which  was  di\dding 
the  Corinthians  an  impious  and  detestable  schism  unworthy 
of  God's  elect.  You  will  walk  faithfully  in  the  ways  of 
the  Lord,  he  tells  them,  by  being  submissive  to  your  pas- 
tors, loving  to  obey  rather  than  to  command.      It  is  just 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.        321 

and  reasonable  that  we  submit  to  God  instead  of  imitating 
those  who,  moved  by  a  detestable  jealousy,  have  given  an 
example  of  pride  and  revolt.  He  adds  that  we  must  obey 
our  pastors  according  to  the  position,  the  rank,  and  the 
measure  of  the  gift  which  God  has  imparted  to  each  one 
in  the  spiritual  edifice  of  the  Church;  that  God  sent  Jesus 
Christ,  and  that  Jesus  Christ  sent  the  apostles.  These 
faithful  ministers,  having  received  orders  from  the  lips  of 
their  Master,  preached  in  the  cities  and  in  the  villages; 
they  chose  men  among  the  first-fruits  of  the  infant  Church, 
and  after  having  tried  them  by  the  Ught  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
with  which  they  were  filled,  they  estabUshed  them  priests 
and  deacons  over  those  who  were  to  accept  the  Gospel,  and 
ordained  that  after  their  death  other  men  tried  in  like  manner 
should  succeed  them  in  the  ministry.  He  says  finally  that 
the  words  pronounced  against  Judas  by  Jesus  must  be  applied 
to  the  authors  of  the  schism:  Woe  to  these  men!  it  were 
better  that  they  had  not  been  bom. 

Let  us  remark  that  the  doctrine  so  clearly  formulated  in 
this  chapter  goes  back  to  the  time  of  the  apostles  of  whom 
St.  Clement  was  a  disciple,  and  consequently  to  Jesus  Christ. 
Though  presented  by  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  it  was  received 
without  protest  by  the  Churches  of  the  East.  Therefore  it 
was  universally  known  and  admitted  in  the  first  centuries, 
and  was  regarded,  not  as  a  new  doctrine,  but  as  coming 
from  Jesus  Christ. 

We  could  cite  much  more  testimony  quite  as  conclusive 
from  St.  Ignatius,  St.  Irenseus,  St.  Cyprian,  and  others.  (See 
Faith  of  CathoHcs,  vol.  i.) 

B.  Sanctity. 

I.   THE  SANCTITY   OF  THE  CHURCH  IN  GENERAL. 

If  we  are  satisfied  with  vague  and  general  terms  we  may 
say  that  Protestants  as  well  as  Catholics  recognize  sanctity 


322  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

as  a  necessary  character  of  the  Church.  They  hold  with  us 
that  Jesus  wished  His  Church  to  be  holy,  and  that  He  estab- 
Hshed  it  only  to  make  men  holy.  This  is  a  point,  moreover, 
which  they  could  hardly  dispute  in  face  of  St.  Paul's  formal 
declaration  to  the  Ephesians:  ''Christ  loved  the  Church  and 
deUvered  Himself  up  for  it  that  He  might  sanctify  it;  .  .  . 
that  He  might  present  it  to  Himself  a  glorious  Church,  not 
having  spot  or  wrinkle,  or  any  such  thing,  but  that  it  should 
be  holy  and  without  blemish"  (Eph.  v.  25,  26,  27).  And 
again,  that  God  estabUshed  a  ministry  ''for  the  perfecting 
of  the  saints,  for  the  work  of  the  ministry,  for  the  edifying  of 
the  body  of  Christ,"  which  He  elsewhere  calls  the  Church 
(Eph.iv.  12;  Col.  i.  24). 

But  when  there  is  a  question  of  explaining  in  what  this 
sanctity  consists,  Protestants  either  exaggerate  or  minimize 
it,  and  thus  fall  into  two  opposite  errors.  The  first  class 
confound  the  sanctity  of  the  Church  with  the  sanctity  of 
each  of  its  members,  and  claim  that  only  just  souls,  who, 
moreover,  are  known  only  to  God,  form  a  part  of  the  Church 
of  Christ.  Others  are  content  with  the  ordinary  and  medi- 
ocre sanctity  common  to  all  the  members  of  the  Church,  and 
reject  as  foreign  to  the  spirit  of  the  Gospel  all  that  breathes 
of  heroism  and  perfection,  particularly  the  vows  and  Hfe  of 
rehgious  orders.  They  deny  particularly  all  miracles  in 
favor  of  eminent  sanctity. 

The  Church's  teaching  on  this  point,  of  wliich  the  follow- 
ing is  a  summary,  hes  between  the  two  extremes.  We  main- 
tain that  the  Church  is  holy  because  her  Author  is  holy  and 
the  source  itself  of  all  holiness;  because  her  end  is  to  make 
men  holy;  because  the  means  she  employs,  her  dogmas^  her 
ethics,  and  her  sacraments,' are  holy  in  themselves  and  lead 
to  holiness;  because,  finally,  she  has  produced  in  all  ages 
members  distinguished  by  sanctity,  some  of  them — those  who 
faithfully  followed  her  guidance — ^by  eminent  sanctity. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       323 

Thesis. — The  Church  of  Christ  is  not  Composed  Exclusively 
of  Men  Just  in  the  Sight  of  God. 

First  Argument,  derived  from  the  Teaching  of  Jesus 
Christ. — The  figures  under  which  Jesus  represents  His 
Church  invariably  present  it  to  us  as  composed  of  just  and 
of  sinners,  as  including  the  wheat  and  the  chaff,  the  faithful 
and  the  unfaithful  servant,  the  wise  and  the  prudent  virgins; 
as  the  field  where  the  tares  are  mingled  with  the  good  grain 
until  the  days  of  the  harvest;  as  a  net  cast  into  the  sea  and 
gathering  all  kinds  of  fish,  good  and  bad,  while  only  the  good 
are  retained  and  the  bad  rejected;  as  a  vineyard  where  the 
barren  fig-tree  is  allowed  to  remain  with  the  fruit- bearing 
trees,  in  the  hope  that  it  will  one  day  bear  fruit. 

Second  Argument,  derived  from  the  Conduct  of  the 
Apostles. — Thus  did  the  apostles,  instructed  by  Jesus,  inter- 
pret hoHness.  We  see  them  in  the  exercise  of  their  ministry 
recaUing  to  their  duty  Christians  whose  conduct  did  not 
correspond  to  their  faith;  they  are  far  from  treating  the 
erring  as  strangers  to  the  Church.  St.  Paul,  when  he  ex- 
communicates the  scandalous  sinner  of  Corinth  and  the 
heretics  Hymeneus  and  Alexander,  does  not  regard  the  other 
sinners,  whom  he  has  not  cut  off,  as  banished  from  the 
Church  (1  Cor.  v.;  1  Tim.  i.  20). 

II.  THE  SANCTITY  OF  THE  CHURCH  CONSIDERED  AS  A  NOTE. 

We  have  just  seen  that  the  Church  is  holy  in  various 
respects.  At  the  same  time  these  different  kinds  of  sanctity 
are  not  all  equally  palpable  and  appreciable;  many  of  them 
serve  only  as  negative  notes. 

The  holiness  specially  regarded  as  a  positive  note  of  the 
Church  is  the  holiness  of  its  members,  and  particularly  the 
heroic  sanctity  of  many  among  them.  This  character  is 
easily  proved,  for  it  is  confirmed  by  striking  miracles  which 
are  not  accidental,  transitory  facts,  but  the  fulfilment  of 


324  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

promises  frequently  uttered  by  Jesus  Christ  and  limited  to 
no  time.  ''He  that  believeth  in  Me/'  said  Our  Saviour, 
*Hhe  works  that  I  do  he  also  shall  do,  and  greater  than  these 
shall  he  do.''  And  again:  ''These  signs  shall  follow  them 
that  believe:  in  My  name  they  shall  cast  out  devils;  they 
shall  speak  with  new  tongues;  they  shall  take  up  serpents; 
and  if  they  shall  drink  any  deadly  thing,  it  shall  not  hurt 
them;  they  shall  lay  their  hands  upon  the  sick,  and  they  shall 
recover"  (John  xiv.  12;  Mark  xvi.  17,  18). 

C.  Catholicity. 

Catholic  means  universal.  The  application  of  this  word 
to  the  Church  means  that  at  every  period  of  her  existence, 
after  the  adequate  diffusion  of  the  Gospel,  she  must  extend 
morally  throughout  the  whole  world,  and  be  everywhere  the 
same. 

Everywhere  the  same;  for  true  Catholicity  supposes 
unity  of  doctrine  and  of  communion,  otherwise  the  Church 
in  China,  for  example,  would  not  he  the  same  as  the  Church 
existing  in  Brazil;  and  it  would  be  false  to  say  that  it  is  one 
and  the  same  Church  in  Brazil  and  in  China.  Hence  it  is 
evident  that  a  collection  of  sects  having  nothing  in  common 
but  a  name  (it  is  well  known  that  this  is  the  present  condition 
of  Protestantism),  even  though  its  various  elements  are 
spread  throughout  the  entire  world,  cannot  merit  the  name 
of  Catholic  or  universal  religion. 

Catholicity  may  be  considered  absolutely,  in  itself;  or 
relatively,  that  is,  in  comparison  with  the  diffusion  of  dissent- 
ing sects. 

a.  Taken  in  an  absolute  sense  it  does  not  require  that  the 
Church  exist  in  all  parts  of  the  world  without  exception,  still 
less  that  it  include  in  its  bosom  the  entire  human  race.  St. 
Matthew  says  clearly  that  when  the  Gospel  shall  be  preached 
to  all  nations  the  end  of  the  world  will  be  at  hand.  Hence 
there  is  no  question  of  a  physical,  but  a  moral  universality. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       325 

To  justify  its  name  of  Catholic  it  suffices  that  the  Church 
include  a  great  part  of  mankind,  and  that  it  exist  in  the 
greater  part  of  the  world  in  a  manner  to  be  recognized  in 
all  the  other  parts.  ''It  is  necessary/'  says  the  illustrious 
theologian  Suarez,  ''that  the  Church  shed  throughout  the 
world  a  certain  imiversal  splendor,  so  that  her  light  may 
shine  everywhere,  and  she  may  be  distinguished  from  all 
heretical  sects."  A  proper  understanding  of  the  Scriptures, 
and  tradition  from  the  earliest  ages,  show  that  this  moral 
universality  is  all  that  is  required. 

b.  Nor  is  it  required  that  the  Church  exceed  in  numbers 
all  the  other  Christian  communities  taken  collectively,  but 
that  it  outnumber  each  one  of  them  taken  singly. 

Thesis. — Catholicity  is   an   Indispensable  Attribute  of  the 
True  Church. 

Proof  Drawn  from  Holy  Scriptures. — a.  It  is  certain 
that  the  ancient  prophecies  concerning  the  Messias  and  His 
work,  which  we  have  cited  elsewhere,  represent  the  Church 
as  destined  to  spread  throughout  the  world.  It  will  be  the 
light  of  nations;  the  light  destined  to  shine  in  the  utmost 
parts  of  the  earth;  the  house  into  w^hich  God  will  gather  all 
the  nations;  a  high  mountain  which  shall  fill  all  the  earth. 
The  Messias  is  to  have  nations  for  His  inheritance,  and  His 
kingdom  will  extend  to  the  utmost  parts  of  the  earth.  The 
kings  of  the  earth  are  to  adore  Him,  all  the  nations  are  to 
obey  Him.  From  the  rising  to  the  setting  of  the  sun  His 
name  will  be  glorified  by  all  nations,  and  in  every  place  there 
will  be  offered  to  His  name  a  pure  oblation.  All  these  pas- 
sages, and  many  others  too  long  to  quote,  are  inexplicable 
if  they  do  not  signify  the  moral  diffusion  of  the  Church 
throughout  the  world. 

b.  The  words  of  Jesus  Himself  are  no  less  clear.  He  tells 
us  that  when  He  is  raised  upon  the  cross  He  will  draw  all 
things  to  Himself.  He  commands  His  apostles  to  preach 
the  Gospel  to  every  creature,  to  instruct  all  nations,  baptizing 


326  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

them  in  the  name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  teaching  them  to  observe  all  whatsoever  He 
had  commanded  them.  He  sends  them  as  His  witnesses  to 
Jerusalem,  throughout  Judea,  Samaria,  and  to  the  extremi- 
ties of  the  earth. 

c.  The  apostles  perfectly  understood  the  design  of  their 
Master.  Faithful  to  His  command  they  preached  the 
Gospel,  first  in  Judea  and  Samaria,  then  they  dispersed 
through  the  pagan  nations;  and  St.  Paul  was  soon  able  to 
write  to  the  Romans  that  their  faith  had  been  announced 
throughout  the  universe.  The  apostles  knew  then  that  Jesus 
wished  the  Church  to  be  Catholic,  and  that  Catholicity  was 
one  of  its  essential  characters,  hence  they  inserted  in  their 
creed  this  article  of  their  faith:  ''  I  believe  in  the  holy  Cath- 
olic Church." 

The  testimony  of  the  Fathers  on  this  point  may  be  found 
in  ''Faith  of  Catholics,"  vol.  i. 

This  Catholicity  is  a  note.  In  fact  it  offers  us  a 
ready  means  of  recognizing  the  true  Church.  It  is  not 
difficult  to  demonstrate  which  among  the  various  Christian 
communions  is  the  Church  that  can  be  said  to  be  morally 
diffused  throughout  the  world  since  the  adequate  promul- 
gation of  the  Gospel,  and  to  include  in  her  bosom  the  greatest 
number  of  members  professing  the  same  faith  by  participation 
in  the  same  sacraments  and  the  same  worship  under  the 
guidance  of  one  and  the  same  apostolic  and  pastoral  ministry. 

Remarks. — 1st.  Strictly  speaking,  another  Christian  com- 
munion might  at  a  given  period  exist  simultaneously  in 
different  parts  of  the  earth,  and  yet  we  must  be  able  at  every 
period  to  distinguish  the  legitimate  communion  from  the 
illegitimate.  CathoHcity,  therefore,  to  be  a  distinctive  mark 
must  have  still  another  character  or  note;  that  is,  the  true 
Church  must  always  outnumber  every  other  Christian  com- 
munion. At  the  same  time,  as  Catholicity  is  essential  to  the 
Church,  it  is  sufficient  to  prove  that  at  a  given  period,  at  the 
present  day,  for  example,  such  a  Christian  society  is  the 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       327 

most  widely  spread  and  the  most  numerous:  we  are  then 
authorized  to  conclude  that  it  is  this  society  which  has  been 
universally  diffused  and  the  most  numerous  at  all  times 
since  the  promulgation  of  the  Gospel. 

2d.  We  must  not  forget  that  by  the  notes  of  the  Church, 
especially  its  CathoHcity,  we  must  distinguish  the  true 
Christian  Church  from  other  Christian  societies.  The  divinity 
of  the  Christian  religion  has  been  shown  in  the  first  part  of 
the  book  (Ch.  III.)  by  other  characteristic  marks. 

D.  Apostolicity. 

In  saying  that  the  true  Church  is  necessarily  apostolic, 
we  mean  that  she  must  profess  the  doctrine  taught  by  the 
apostles:  this  is  apostohcity  of  doctrine;  then,  that  she 
must  be  able  to  trace  her  descent  from  the  apostles  through 
the  succession  of  her  lawful  heads:  this  is  apostohcity  of 
ministry  or  government.  Apostolicity  of  doctrine  is  the 
logical  and  indispensable  consequence  of  the  unity  required 
in  the  true  Church.  The  necessity  of  this  characteristic  is 
rarely  disputed,  but  it  is  of  little  service  as  a  note,  as  a  positive 
means  of  discerning  the  true  Church.  Hence  we  shall  dwell 
more  particularly  on  the  apostolicity  of  ministry.  We  have 
shown  above,  pp.  303  f .,  318  f .,  that  all  authority  in  the  Church 
has  been  really  bestowed  upon  the  apostles.  This  authority 
must,  as  we  shall  prove,  pass  to  their  successors. 

Thesis. — Jesus  Christ  Willed  that  the  Powers  Given  to  His 
Apostles  should  he  Transmitted  to  all  their  Successors. 

First  Argument. — a.  Jesus  imposed  upon  Peter,  and  then 
upon  all  the  apostles,  the  exercise  of  the  ministry  which  His 
Father  had  confided  to  Him  for  the  purpose  of  saving  all  men 
till  the  end  of  time.  Hence  this  ministry  is  essential  to  the 
Church,  and  must  be  indefectible  and  perpetual.  There  must 
always,  until  the  end  of  the  world,  be  men  who  exercise  it 
in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ ;  there  must  also  always  be  a  f  oun- 


S28  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

dation  which  supports  the  edifice,  always  one  in  whom  is 
deposited  the  power  of  the  keys,  always  a  supreme  pastor  to 
feed  the  entire  flock,  always  heads  associated  with  him  for 
preaching  the  word  and  for  governing  the  Church.  This 
foundation,  this  depositary,  this  supreme  pastor,  these  sub- 
ordinate heads  cannot  be  Peter  and  the  apostles  in  their 
individual  persons  alone,  since  they  are  mortal;  they  must 
be  also  Peter  and  the  apostles  in  the  persons  of  their  suc- 
cessors. Now,  because  they  only,  and  no  others,  have  re- 
ceived their  character  and  their  power  from  Jesus  Christ, 
they,  and  they  only,  can  and  must  transmit  this  character 
and  this  power  to  whomsoever  they  choose ;  and  those  chosen 
can  and  must,  in  turn,  transmit  these  prerogatives  to  others 
until  the  end  of  the  world. 

b.  Christ  assures  us  that  His  Church  will  last  to  the  end 
of  the  world.  But  no  society  can  exist  for  any  length  of 
time  without  an  authority  which  is  its  very  foundation. 
Such  an  authority  must,  therefore,  be  forever  perpetual 
in  the  Church.  Hence  Christ  willed  that  the  ministry  or 
authority  given  to  the  apostles  should  forever  pass  to  their 
lawful  successors  in  office,  being  with  them  but  one  moral 
person.  He  made  no  other  provision  for  the  continuance 
of  the  ministry  in  the  Church. 

c.  The  true  Church  of  Christ  must  ever,  imtil  the  end  of 
time,  be  distinguishable  from  heterodox  churches;  she  must 
ever,  until  the  end  of  time,  be  able  to  prove  her  descent  from 
the  apostles  by  the  uninterrupted  succession  of  her  pastors. 

Second  Argument.  —  We  see  from  the  history  of  the 
apostles  that  they  did  indeed  transmit  to  others  the  powers 
which  they  had  received  from  Jesus  Christ,  by  appointing 
bishops  everywhere  to  replace  and  succeed  them.  Thus  St. 
Paul  made  Timothy  bishop  of  Ephesus,  and  Titus  bishop  of 
Crete,  charging  them  to  perpetuate  their  ministry  by  ap- 
pointing other  pastors  (Tit.  i.  5). 

Third  Argument. — Tradition  furnishes  a  most  decisive 
proof  for  our  thesis.     But  we  must  refer  the  reader  to  special 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       329 

treatises  on  the  subject.  (See  ''Faith  of  Catholics,"  vol.  i.) 
Remarks. — 1st.  The  ministry  confided  by  Jesus  Christ  to 
the  apostles,  and  by  the  apostles  to  the  bishops,  their  suc- 
cessors, includes  a  twofold  power,  the  power  of  order  and 
the  power  of  jurisdiction. 

a.  Power  of  order  regards  the  administration  of  the  sacra- 
ments. Bishops  alone  possess  it  in  all  its  fulness.  Hence 
there  is  no  priestly  office  which  they  cannot  exercise;  and 
they  alone  can  confer  upon  others  the  sacred  character  which 
they  have  received.  This  character  is  conferred  by  sacra- 
mental ordination  according  to  the  fixed  rite,  which  dates 
from  the  time  of  the  apostles.  Every  vahdly  consecrated 
bishop  has  the  power  of  ordaining  other  bishops.  Even  should 
he  fall  into  heresy  or  schism,  the  consecration  or  ordination 
performed  by  him  would  still  be  valid  though  not  lawful, 
provided  he  observed  the  prescribed  rite.  The  power  of  order 
is  inamissihUj  i.e.,  once  obtained  it  can  never  be  lost. 

h.  The  'power  of  jurisdiction  includes  at  the  same  time  the 
faculty  of  lawfully  exercising  the  power  of  order  and  the 
right  of  taking  part  in  the  government  of  the  Church.  This 
faculty  and  this  right  are  conferred  by  canonical  institution^ 
and  depend  on  the  will  of  the  supreme  head  of  the  Church. 
No  bishop  who  has  not  received  jurisdiction  from  the  head 
of  the  Church  can  lawfully  ordain  a  priest  or  consecrate  a 
bishop,  even  though  he  do  it  validly;  nor  can  he  take  part,  even 
validly,  in  the  administration  and  government  of  the  Church. 
To  be  in  the  legitimate  and  full  line  of  succession  of  the 
pastors  of  the  Church,  that  is,  in  the  hierarchy  of  jurisdic- 
tion, it  does  not  suffice  that  a  bishop  have  received  the  power 
of  order;  he  must  also  have  the  power  of  jurisdiction.  In 
other  words,  it  is  not  sufficient  that  he  be  consecrated  bishop ; 
he  must  also  have  received  with  his  consecration  the  right 
of  administering  a  diocese,  which  in  virtue  of  the  apostolic 
succession  becomes  thus  attached  to  one  of  the  primitive 
apostolic  sees.  This  is  a  self-evident  proposition  which  may 
be  proved  by  the  words  of  all  the  Fathers,  who  condenm 


330  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

as  schismatics,  bishops  in  possession  of  usurped  sees.  The 
episcopacy  is  estabhshed  for  the  administration  of  the 
Church,  and  a  bishop  is  a  chief  or  ruler  in  the  Church. 
Hence  he  must  have  subjects.  But  one  cannot  give  himself 
subjects;  Jesus  alone,  who  has  received  from  His  Father  the 
nations  as  a  heritage,  could  confide  to  whom  He  pleased  the 
power  to  govern  the  faithful,  that  is,  the  power  of  jurisdiction. 
He  confided  it,  as  we  have  seen,  to  the  apostles,  and  chiefly 
to  Peter,  their  head,  with  power  to  transmit  it.  Hence  a 
Christian  society  whose  bishops  go  back  to  the  apostles  only 
through  the  power  of  order,  and  not  also  through  the  power 
of  jurisdiction,  cannot  claim  to  be  apostoUc,  and  consequently 
cannot  be  the  Church  of  Christ. 

c.  It  belongs  to  the  heads  of  the  Church  to  transmit  this 
power  of  jurisdiction  and  to  determine  the  mode  of  trans- 
mission left  undetermined  by  Christ.  This  mode  may  have 
varied  in  the  course  of  time,  particularly  in  regard  to  the 
selection  of  subjects  who  are  to  receive  this  jurisdiction. 
Without  prejudice,  however,  to  the  vicar  of  Christ's  essential 
right  of  free  nomination  in  regard  to  all  dignities  and  offices 
outside  his  own,  subjects  have  been  chosen,  sometimes  by 
election,  sometimes  by  presentation,  sometimes  by  the  will 
alone  of  the  successors  of  St.  Peter. 

As  the  canonical  rules  observed  in  this  transmission  were 
established  by  the  Church,  and  not  by  Jesus  Christ,  the 
Church  has  a  right  to  modify  them  according  to  circum- 
stances. But  the  jurisdiction  itself  always  resides  in  the 
heads  of  the  Church,  and  is  always  transmitted  by  canonical 
laws  in  force  at  the  time.  Consequently  whosoever  has 
not  received  jurisdiction  according  to  these  rules  does  not 
possess  it,  and  though  he  may  have  received  episcopal  con- 
secration he  does  not  belong  to  the  ecclesiastical  hierarchy. 
Having  neither  see  nor  subjects,  it  is  evident  that  he  cannot 
be  one  of  the  heads  of  the  Church,  and  has  no  claim  to  apos- 
tolic succession.^ 

*  A.  C.  Q.  XX.  225  (Order  and  Jurisdiction). 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       331 

2d.  Bishops  have  the  same  functions  and  the  same  powers 
as  the  apostles.  There  are,  however,  certain  personal  privi- 
leges which  the  apostles  as  founders,  after  Christ,  of  the 
Chiu-ch  alone  enjoyed,  and  which  they  did  not  transmit  to 
their  successors;  such  are:  infalhbility  in  teaching  the  doc- 
trine of  Jesus  Christ,  the  right  to  preach  the  Gospel  through- 
out the  world  and  to  govern  the  faithful,  and  the  right  to 
erect  bishoprics  by  their  own  authority. 

These  two  powers  of  order  and  jurisdiction  are  commu- 
nicated to  priests,  but  in  a  hmited  degree  and  in  view  of 
certain  acts  only;  for  example,  the  administration  of  sacra- 
mental absolution. 


ART.  II.— THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  POSSESSES  THE  FOUR 
POSITIVE  NOTES  OF  THE  TRUE  CHURCH. 

I.  The  Church  of  Rome  Possesses  Unity.* 

A.  The  Church  is  One  in  Doctrine. — Throughout  the 
whole  world  we  find  the  children  of  the  Church  chanting  and 
professing  the  same  creed,  accepting  the  same  precepts,  the 
same  sacrifice,  the  same  sacraments.  And  if  we  go  back  to 
apostolic  times  we  find  the  same  identity  of  doctrine. 

The  Church,  moreover,  possesses  a  principle  which  neces- 
sarily sustains  unity  of  belief:  she  professes  as  an  essential 
dogma  that  all  must  accept  every  doctrine  which  she  pro- 
claims to  be  of  faith,  under  pain,  if  they  persist  in  error,  of 
being  ejected  from  her  bosom.^ 

Remark. — It  can  never  be  proved  that  the  Church  of 
Rome  has  ever  ceased  to  teach  a  single  dogma  contained 
in  the  apostohc  writings,  or  that  she  has  ever  admitted  a 
point  of  doctrine  contrary  to  these  writings.  Never  has  she 
defined  a  truth  without  previously  demonstrating  that  the 

^Rhodes;   Preston;   Harper,  I.,  essay  1;   Newman,   Difficulty  of 
Anglicans,  1.  10, 11 ;  D.  R.  New  Ser.  xv.  458;  C.  W.  lix.  152. 
*  Lacordaire,  conf .  29,  30,  Cath.  Doctr.  and  Society. 


332  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

apostles  taught  it  either  in  writing  or  by  word  of  mouth.  The 
Council  of  Nice,  for  example,  did  not  create  the  dogma  of 
the  divinity  of  Jesus  Christ  when,  in  refutation  of  the  Arian 
heresy,  it  defined  the  consubstantiality  of  the  Word,  any 
more  than  the  Council  of  Trent  created  the  dogma  of  transub- 
stantiation  when  it  defined  the  Eucharist,  in  refutation  of 
the  Protestant  doctrine  of  the  Eucharist.  On  the  contrary, 
it  was  only  because  these  dogmas  were  always  believed  in 
the  Church  that  the  Councils  could  define  them.  Thus  in 
our  own  day  the  Immaculate  Conception  of  the  Blessed  Vir- 
gin and  the  infalHbility  of  the  Roman  Pontiff  have  been 
declared  articles  of  the  Cathohc  faith.  But  they  are  not  new 
articles  added  to  its  doctrine,  they  are  simply  ulterior  devel- 
opments of  the  doctrine  revealed  by  Jesus  Christ,  and  taught 
from  the  beginning  of  the  Church ;  they  are  truths  impHcitly 
contained  in  the  deposit  of  revelation,  which  were  brought 
forward  more  prominently  to  confound  the  adversaries  of 
the  ancient  faith  and  preserve  the  people  from  a  pernicious 
error.  ^ 

^  If  dogma  is  immutable,  like  truth  tself,  this  immutability  does 
not  exclude  progress.  Progress  in  the  Church  is  only  the  develop- 
ment of  principles  laid  down  by  Jesus  Christ.  Thus,  for  example, 
the  Church  has  declared  or  defined  in  three  successive  Councils  that 
there  are  in  Jesus  Christ  one  person,  two  natures,  and  two  wills.  These 
three  definitions  are  only  logical  developments  of  one  and  the  same 
truth,  which,  under  its  primitive,  its  revealed  form,  was  known  and 
taught  at  all  times :  Jesus  Christ  is  at  the  same  time  true  God  and 
true  man. 

The  following  remarks  will  illustrate  still  more  clearly  the  manner 
in  which  doctrine  is  developed  in  the  Church. 

1st.  There  are  in  revelation  a  certain  number  of  points  which,  in 
the  first  days  of  Christianity,  were  formally  and  explicitly  presented 
to  the  belief  of  the  faithful. 

2d.  There  are  others  which  in  the  beginning  were  not  explicitly 
given,  and  were  destined,  in  the  plan  of  divine  Providence,  to  be 
developed  gradually  in  the  course  of  time  and  under  the  direction 
of  authority. 

3d.  The  history  of  the  latter  contains  three  different  periods  or 
epochs.     In  the  first  period  they  are  not  immediately  obvious,  either 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.        333 

B.  The  Church  of  Rome  is  One  in  her  Ministry. — There 
is  nothing  more  palpable  or  more  readil}^  recognized.  Unity 
of  faith,  which  we  have  just  demonstrated,  is  maintained  in 
the  Church  by  a  unique,  invariable,  and  perfectly  known 
ministry.  The  gentle  but  firm  action  of  this  ministry  has 
its  source  at  Rome,  the  centre  of  government,  whence  it  is 
conveyed  by  means  of  bishops  and  subordinate  pastors  to 
all  parts  of  the  world  until  it  reaches  the  humblest  members 
of  the  Church.  The  simple  faithful  are  united  to  their  imme- 
diate pastors,  the  latter  are  united  to  their  bishops,  the 
bishops  are  united  with  the  Pope,  from  wliich  they  hold 
their  faculties.  Thus  is  the  most  comphcated  multiplicity 
reduced  to  the  most  marvellous  unity.  Here  again  is  a 
principle  which  sustains  this  unity :  he  who  refuses  to  submit 
to  the  authority  of  the  lawful  pastors  of  the  Church  is  excluded 
from  her  bosom. 

History  testifies  that  this  unity,  which  we  admire  at  the 
present  day,  has  remained  unbroken  through  all  the  Christian 
centuries.  Disciplinary  laws  may  vary  with  circumstances, 
for  they  are  not  a  divine  but  an  ecclesiastical  institution: 

because  of  their  deep  metaphysical  character,  which  caused  their 
connection  with  the  principles  revealed  to  remain  unobserved,  or 
because  of  circumstances  which  do  not  permit  institutions  to  manifest 
themselves  completely  in  the  first  days  of  their  existence,  or  simply 
because  of  the  actual  impossibility  of  the  human  mind  to  think  of 
everything  at  the  same  tiine. 

In  the  second  period  these  truths,  which  lay  dormant  in  the  Chris- 
tian conscience,  began  to  be  agitated;  they  made  more  impression 
than  heretofore;  they  were  preached  and  were  presented  as  new  food 
of  piety  to  the  faithful.  Then  it  happened  that  certain  persons  con- 
tested them,  alleged  the  obscurity  of  the  tradition  upon  which  they 
rested,  and  protested  against  their  being  considered  as  part  of 
revelation. 

In  the  third  period  authority  established  them  as  articles  of  faith, 
and  decided  that  they  were  originally  contained  in  revelation. 
(Card.  Franzelin.)  * 

*  Newman  on  Development;  D.  R.  New  Ser.  xii.  28,  Apr.  1901 ;  Humphrey,  Written 
Word,  ch.  11;  Br.  W.  xiv.  1;  Garside,  p.  153  ff.;  Schanz,  III.,  ch.  1;  C.  W.  Ixxii.; 
I.  E.  R.,  July  1901. 


334  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

the  authority  which  has  estabhshed  them  has  a  right  to 
abohsh  or  modify  them;  in  fact  it  must  needs  vary  them 
according  to  the  exigencies  of  the  times.  But  the  hierarchy, 
the  ministry  for  the  governing  and  the  teaching  of  the  faithful, 
is  a  divine  institution.  It  comes  from  Jesus  Christ,  and 
consequently  never  varies.  Let  us  observe  in  passing  that 
the  worship  and  ceremonial  also  may,  for  analogous  reasons, 
undergo  certain  modifications  in  rites  or  accessory  ceremonies, 
but  it  remains  in  all  places  and  at  all  times  the  same  in  every- 
thing essential  established  by  Christ. 

Objection.— At  the  period  of  the  great  schism  of  the  West, 
from  1378  to  1417,  there  were  two  Popes  reigning  at  the 
same  time.  Urban  VI.  at  Rome,  Clement  VII.  at  Avignon. 
Among  Christian  nations  some  gave  their  allegiance  to 
Urban,  others  to  Clement.  Did  not  this  destroy  for  nearly 
half  a  century  the  Church's  unity  of  ministry  or  government?  * 

Reply. — It  is  true  that  during  this  time  the  material  union 
of  government  was  disturbed  in  the  Church,  but  formal  or 
essential  unity  never  ceased  to  exist.  There  were  not  two 
legitimate  popes  any  more  than  there  are  at  the  present  day; 
but  various  circumstances  made  it  difficult  to  discern  clearly 
the  veritable  supreme  head  of  the  Church  and  caused  a 
deplorable  division.  The  situation,  which  Catholics  ac- 
knowledged was  contrary  to  the  will  of  God,  was  a  source  of 
great  grief  to  them.  Both  sides  sought  the  truth  and  never 
desisted  until  every  doubt  was  dissipated,  and  the  entire 
Church  acknowledged  Martin  V.,  elected  in  1417  by  the 
Council  of  Constance. 

Hence  this  schism,  which  is  easily  explained  by  an  error  in  a 
question  of  facts,  in  no  way  weakens  our  thesis ;  it  proves,  on 
the  contrary,  the  profound  spirit  of  unity  which  animated  the 
members  of  the  entire  Church.  No  one  admitted  the  simul- 
taneous existence  of  two  lawful  heads;    all  were  convinced 

^  Dr.  Brann;  Rhodes;  Preston  (Ch.  Unity);  Spalding,  J.  M.,  Mis- 
cellanies, ch.  9;  A.  C.  Q.  xvi.  67;  M.  Ixxviii.  77,  194;  Br.  W.  yii. 
320;  Murphy,  ch.  20;  Parsons,  Studies,  II.,  ch.  36,  39. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH        335 

that  there  was,  and  that  there  could  be,  but  one ;  but  who 
this  one  head  was  remained  for  a  time  doubtful.  Evidently 
one  part  of  Christianity  erred  in  their  choice;  but  they 
erred  in  good  faith,  and  the  obedience  of  both  sides  was 
conscientiously  given. 

II.  The  Church  of  Rome  Possesses  Sanctity.* 

The  Church  of  Rome  is  holy  in  her  final  end,  which  is 
the  sanctification  and  the  salvation  of  the  faithful.  She  is 
holy  in  the  means  she  employs;  in  her  dogmas  which  are 
attacked  only  because  of  their  sublimity  and  because  many 
of  them  transcend,  as  to  their  essence,  the  limit  of  human 
reason;  in  her  moral  teaching,  to  which  even  her  adversaries 
pay  homage,  which  proscribes  all  vices,  inculcates  all  virtues, 
and  culminates  in  the  perfection  of  the  evangelical  coimsels ;  ^ 
in  her  sacraments,  fruitful  sources  of  grace  and  holiness;  in 
her  worship,  the  most  spiritual  which  ever  existed,  the  purest 
and  freest  from  immoral  or  superstitious  practices.^  She 
is  holy,  finally,  in  the  members  who  faithfully  follow  her 
precepts;  only  those  who  refuse  to  conform  to  her  teaching, 
and  thus  incur  her  condemnation,  fail  to  witness  to  her 
sanctity.^ 

^  Thebaud,  The  Church  and  the  Moral  World;  Digby,  Mores  Catho- 
lici;  Ricards,  Catholic  Christianity,  ch.  3  ff.;  Lacordaire,  conf.  21,  29, 
on  Cath.  Doctr  and  the  Soul,  A.  C.  Q.  v.  385,  ix.  166,  xix.  813; 
C.  W.  vii.,  ix.  529;  Br.  W.  vi.  409. 

^  On  charges  of  immoral  doctrines  and  practices  see  below,  ch.  4, 
art.  10.  The  Church  is  holy  in  her  legislation;  because  its  whole 
object  is  to  insure  and  facilitate  (a)  the  success  of  her  apostolic  mis- 
sion; (6)  the  faithful  observance  of  the  divine  law;  (c)  the  attainment 
of  higher  Christian  perfection. — Editor. 

^Bridgett;  Chateaubriand,  G  nius,  etc.;  Wiseman,  Essays,  vol.  ii.; 
Ricards,  1.  c,  ch.  7;  J.  L.  Spalding,  Lectures,  1.  7;  Chatard,  Christian 
Truths,  1.  8;  Lockhart,  1.  c,  ch.  17  ff.;  Shadier,  Beauties  of  the 
Catholic  Church:  Br.  W.  vi.  380,  viii.  117;  A.  C.  Q.  xi.  462;  D.  R. 
Old  Ser.  ix.  2,  xxxv.  362,  xliii.  391;  C.  W.  iv.  721,  xv.  605,  xix.  322, 
xliii.  250. 

*Bowden,  The  Witness  of  the  Saints;  Burnet,  Path,  ch.  10;  Allies, 


336  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

It  would  be  difficult  to  enumerate  the  legions  of  holy 
children  which  the  Church  of  Rome  has  borne.  Without 
mentioning  Christian  heroes  of  the  first  ages,  where  shall  we 
find  outside  the  Church  any  that  can  be  compared  to  men 
Hke  St.  Benedict,  St.  Thomas  Aquinas,  St.  Francis  of  Assisi, 
St.  Dominic,  St.  Francis  de  Sales,  St.  Ignatius  Loyola,  St. 
Francis  Xavier,  St  Vincent  of  Paul,  St.  Elizabeth  of  Hungary, 
St.  Teresa,  and  innumerable  others?  In  addition  to  these 
saints  of  all  ages  placed  upon  her  altars,  who  professed  no 
other  faith  than  that  of  the  Church  of  Rome  and  whom  she 
alone  can  claim,  she  has  nourished  in  her  bosom  innumerable 
souls  of  no  less  solid  virtue,  whose  sanctity,  though  hidden 
from  the  eyes  of  the  world,  equalled  that  of  the  canonized 
saints.  And  in  our  own  day,  in  the  midst  of  the  corruption 
of  the  world,  as  many  good  works  and  deeds  of  virtue  are 
performed  under  the  influence  of  the  same  quickening  spirit 
as  in  the  preceding  centuries.*  God  has  been  pleased  to 
proclaim  at  all  times  the  eminent  sanctity  of  the  heroes  of 
the  Church  by  the  most  striking  miracles — miracles  which 
can  be  attributed  only  to  divine  intervention,  and  which  are 
confirmed  by  such  irrefutable  testimony  that  to  question 
them  is  to  annihilate  history  and  refuse  the  testimony  of 
reason. 

For  many  centuries  the  examination  of  miracles  has  been 
reserved  to  the  Pope.  We  find  in  the  capitularies  of  Charle- 
magne a  prohibition  against  publishing  any  miracle  before 
the  sovereign  Pontiff  has  pronounced  upon  it.  It  is  well 
known  how  carefully  and  severely  miracles  in  cases  of  canoni- 
zation are  tested  by  the  Congregation  of  Rites  under  the 
guidance  of  the  supreme  Pontiff.^  And  yet  how  many 
The  Monastic  Life;  Br.  W.  viii.  219;  Scheeben,  Sanctity  of  the  Ch. 
in  the  XIX.  Cent'y. 

*  C.  W.  li.  533;  also  Oratorian  Lives  of  Modern  Saints. 

'  Faber,  W.,  Essay  on  Beatificat  on  and  Canonization;  D.  R.  New 
Ser.  xxvi  1 ;  Benedict  XIV.  on  Heroic  Virtue  (first  vol.  of  Oratorian 
Lives);  Burnet  Path,  ch.  6;  J.  M.  Spalding,  Evid.,  1.5;  Baart,  The 
Roman  Court,  ch.  5. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       337 

miracles  have  been  authentically  proved  in  the  last  centuries ! 
For  example,  those  of  St.  Francis  Xavier,  St.  John  de  Cuper- 
tino, St.  Philip  Neri,  St.  Francis  de  Sales.  The  severe  and 
learned  Pope  Benedict  XIV.,  in  the  appendix  to  his  great 
work  on  the  canonization  of  the  saints,  relates  the  most 
striking  miracles,  among  others  those  of  St.  Elizabeth  of 
Portugal,  St.  Pius  V.,  St.  Andrew  of  Avellino,  St.  Felix  of 
Cantalicio,  St.  Catharine  of  Bologna,  etc.  The  work  of  the 
Bollandists,  that  gigantic  monument  to  the  glory  of  the 
saints,  gives  abundant  proof  of  the  continuity  of  this  divine 
testimony  in  favor  of  the  Catholic  Church.  We  have 
already  stated  above  the  reason  why  miracles  are  not  as 
numerous  at  the  present  day  as  in  the  first  ages  of  the  Church. 
We  must  bear  in  mind,  moreover,  that  the  miracles  of  the 
early  ages,  being  supported  by  incontestable  testimony,  are 
quite  as  conclusive  for  us.  They  proclaim  to-day,  as  they 
did  then,  the  holiness  of  the  Church  in  favor  of  which  they 
were  wrought;  they  demonstrate  that  God  gives  the  most 
manifest  approval  to  the  virtues  practised  in  her  bosom. 
Finally,  the  Church's  remarkable  preservation  and  the 
marvellous  results  which  she  continually  produces  in  the 
world  are  true  miracles  and  become  more  and  more  striking 
as  her  age  increases. 

Our  own  century  has  not  lacked  the  testimony  of  divine 
miracles.  The  most  exacting  critic  has  only  to  read  the 
life  of  the  venerable  Cure  of  Ars  and  writers  on  Lourdes^ 
to  recognize  that  the  power  of  God  still  abides  with  His  true 
children. 

*  Dr.  Lasserre  and  Clarke,  S.J.,  on  Lourdes;  Dr.  Lefevre  and  Card. 
Walsh  on  Louise  Lateau;  the  articles  in  C.  W.  xiii.  1,  xxxix.  835,  on 
the  liquefaction  of  the  blood  of  St.  Januarius,  liv.  897,  on  Lourdes,  xiv. 
171,  on  Louise  Lateau;  also  D.  R.  New  Ser.  xvii.  170;  Irish  Eccl. 
Record,  Aug.  1900,  "Modern  Miracles";  Searle,  Plain  Facts,  ch.  21; 
Parsons,  Studies,  VI.,  n.  22, 


338  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

III.  The  Church  of  Rome  Possesses  Catholicity. 

The  Church  of  Rome  is  CathoUc  at  all  times  and  in  all 
places:^  this  is  so  manifest  that  she  alone  has  always  been 
designated  by  this  glorious  title,  and  no  dissenting  com- 
munion has  ever  dared  to  assume  it.^  As  early  as  the  time 
of  St.  Augustine,  the  name  Catholic  designated  exclusively 
the  members  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  at  all  times  we 
have  proclaimed  Christian  our  name,  Catholic  our  surname.^ 

After  she  took  possession  of  the  world  through  the  eight 
thousand  men  of  every  tongue  and  every  nation  converted 
by  St.  Peter,  the  Church  never  ceased  to  spread  and  to  wm 
new  subjects.*  This  we  have  already  seen  from  our  reflec- 
tions on  the  rapid  propagation  of  the  Gospel  throughout  the 
world.  At  the  end  of  the  first  century  the  Church  had  gone 
beyond  the  limits  of  the  Roman  empire,  and  since  that  time 
her  ascendency  over  barbarism  continually  increased,  re- 
covering in  one  country  what  she  lost  in  another,  and  ever 
finding  reproduced  in  some  part  of  the  world  the  marvellous 
fruitfulness  of  her  youth. 

This  marvellous  universality  is  as  strikingly  manifested 
at  the  present  day.  Let  us  pass  in  review  the  most  distant 
countries,  the  most  obscure  islands  of  the  ocean,  and  we  shall 
find  Catholics  everywhere,  and  we  shall  find  not  only  that 

^  Lacordaire,  conf.  31,  Cath  Doctr.  and  Society. 

^  It  is  only  of  late  years  that  Protestants  have  endeavored  to  claim 
this  title  by  establishing  the  fallacious  distinction  of  Catholic  and 
Roman  Catholic.  But,  as  the  author  of  "Catholic  Belief"  observes, 
"the  word  Roman  does  not  limit  the  word  Catholic,  but  completes 
it,  declaring  more  expressly  that  which  is  already  supposed  in  the 
word  Catholic,  viz.,  that  the  Catholic  Church  has  its  centre  in  Rome." 
— Translator. 

^  Capel,  Catholic,  etc.;  Austin,  Notes  on  the  Catholic  Name;  C.  W. 
i.  96,  669,  741;  Spalding,  Evid.,  1.  4;  A.  E.  R.,  Sept.  1902,  Febr.  1903. 

*  Marshall,  Cath.  Missions;  Wiseman,  Lectures  on  Doctrines  of  the 
Church,  11.  6,  7;  D.  R.  III.  Ser.  xii.,  xiii.,  xvii,  xxi.;  Spalding,  Evi- 
dences, 1.  4.    See  also  above,  p.  217  ff. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       339 

the  Catholic  Church  is  spread  throughout  all  countries  of  the 
earth,  but  that  she  far  exceeds  in  numbers  each  of  the  other 
Christian  societies.^ 

IV.  The  Church  of  Rome  Possesses  Apostolicity. 

A.  The  Doctrine  of  the  Church  of  Rome  Goes  back  to 
THE  Time  of  the  Apostles. — Her  doctrine  of  to-day  is  the 
same  as  that  of  the  apostles.  In  speaking  of  the  unity  of 
doctrine  in  the  Church  we  demonstrated  a  complete  identity 
between  the  oldest  creeds  or  professions  of  faith,  the  writings 
and  decisions  of  the  first  ages  and  those  of  our  time. 

Protestants  claim,  it  is  true,  that  after  the  first  centuries 
the  Church  of  Rome  created  new  dogmas ;  for  example,  that 
of  the  real  presence,  purgatory,  and  the  invocation  of  the 
saints.  We  have  replied  to  this  objection  (p.  332).  More- 
over, such  a  statement  is  worthless  unless  proved.  It 
is  necessary  to  show  when  and  how  these  dogmas  were  intro- 
duced into  the  Church ;  this  our  opponents  have  never  done, 
and  for  a  good  reason.  Meanwhile  what  is  stated  without 
proof  the  Church  has  a  right  to  deny  without  proof,  for  she  is 
in  possession.  She  does  not,  however,  lack  proof:  she  has 
history  to  testify  how  zealously  in  the  first  ages  popes  and 
bishops  opposed  all  doctrinal  innovations.  Hence  they 
would  have  offered  the  same  opposition  to  the  introduction 
of  the  important  dogmas  contested  by  Protestants.  They 
did  not  do  so,  for  ecclesiastical  history,  so  watchful  in  matters 
of  this  kind,  is  silent  on  this  point.  Perhaps  it  will  be  said 
that  all  the  members  of  the  Church,  pastors  and  flocks  in  all 
parts  of  the  world,  agreed  to  admit  without  protest  such 
numerous  and  grave  innovations.  In  the  first  place,  this 
hypothesis  is  absurd;  in  the  second,  the  heretics  of  that 
period  would  not  have  failed  to  make  themselves  heard :  con- 
demned as  innovators  by  the  Church,  they  would  have  seized 
the  opportunity  to  reproach  her  with  her  own  innovations. 

*  Lacordaire,  conf.  1  and  31  on  the  Church. 


340  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

Remark  on  Tradition. — In  the  language  of  theology 
tradition  is  the  attestation  of  a  fact,  a  dogma,  a  custom,  not 
formally  contained  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  If  the  attesta- 
tion, made  first  by  word  of  mouth,  has  been  afterward  con- 
signed to  the  works  of  the  Fathers  or  other  historic  documents 
which  witness  to  their  existence,  it  is  called  written  tradition; 
otherwise  it  is  oral  tradition.  Tradition  of  which  we  treat 
here,  and  which  has  its  very  source  in  the  apostles  them- 
selves, is  properly  called  apostolic  tradition.  But  inasmuch 
as  in  matters  of  faith  and  morals  they  can  have  taught  only 
what  they  received  from  the  very  mouth  of  Jesus  Christ 
or  by  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  it  is  also  called  with 
reason  divine  tradition.^ 

Taken  in  this  last  sense  the  name  tradition  is  applied  by 
theologians  sometimes  to  a  collection  of  truths  and  precepts 
communicated  first  verbally  by  the  apostles:  thus  we  say 
the  deposit  of  apostolic  tradition;  sometimes  to  the  fact 
itself  of  the  uninterrupted  transmission  of  these  truths  or 
precepts:  thus  we  say  such  a  point  of  dogma  or  morals 
is  established  by  tradition;  sometimes,  finally,  in  a  complex 
manner,  to  these  same  truths  and  precepts  as  transmitted 
from  age  to  age,  from  the  apostles  to  us:  this  is  the  sense 
in  which  we  employ  it  here.^ 

*  Humphrey,  Written  Word,  ch.  7,  8;  Card.  Manning  Grounds  of 
Faith;  A.  C.  Q.  xii.  409;  Walworth,  ch.  11 ;  Wiseman,  lect.  1-7;  Hunter, 
I.,tr.  2,  ch.  1. 

2  "  If  there  is  a  book,"  says  the  learned  Le  Hir,  "  to  which  the  key  is 
found  in  tradition  alone,  it  is  the  Bible.  But  here  philological  tradi- 
tion is  not  enough  if  it  be  not  intimately  allied  with  dogmatic  tradi- 
tion. I  would  like  you  to  understand  how  very  imperfect,  defective, 
erroneous,  and  often  bizarre  is  a  science  of  the  past  that  is  cut  loose 
from  the  great  tree  of  tradition  The  last  Phoenician  workman, 
if  he  came  back  to  us,  could  teach  our  greatest  experts  in  the  deci- 
phering and  interpretation  of  the  texts  of  his  country.  In  the  midst 
of  life,  where  he  once  moved,  and  in  the  daily  exchange  of  ideas  and 
reports  forming  a  living  tradition,  he  would  find  advantages  and 
resources  which  the  most  profound  researches  could  only  imperfectly 
supply."     See  also  Didon,  J.  Ch.,  introd.  pp.  xxxiv.  and  xliv. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       341 

Among  the  truths  attested  by  tradition  alone,  and  which 
are  not  expUcitly  taught  in  Holy  Scripture,  let  us  cite  as 
examples  the  Assumption  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  and  the  va- 
lidity of  baptism  administered  by  heretics  with  the  requisite 
form  and  matter. 

There  are  three  principal  organs  of  tradition,  that  is,  three 
means  by  which  we  may  go  back  without  fear  of  error  to 
the  apostolic  source;  they  are  the  universal  and  constant 
belief  of  the  Church,  the  sacred  liturgy,  and  the  ancient  his- 
toric monuments,  particularly  the  writings  of  the  Fathers.^ 

We  shall  not  dwell  any  further  on  tradition,  though  it  is 
of  very  great  importance  for  the  knowledge  of  revealed  truth; 
here  we  have  to  establish  the  foundations  of  faith  and  to 
furnish  proofs  of  the  divine  origin  of  the  Church.  Now  to 
attain  this  end  tradition,  from  a  theological  point  of  view 
as  an  infallible  source  of  doctrine,  does  not  offer  many  ad- 
vantages. When  we  have  recourse  to  it,  it  will  be  as  to  a 
historic  testimony  of  incontestable  value. ^ 

B.  The  Ministry  of  the  Church  Goes  Back  to  the 
Time  of  the  Apostles  through  the  Uninterrupted  Suc- 
cession OF  her  Chief  Pastors. — All  history  testifies  to  the 
fact  that  the  sovereign  pontiffs  have  come  down  in  unin- 
terrupted succession  from  Peter  to  Leo  XIII.  The  popes 
have  always  proclaimed  themselves  before  the  world  the  suc- 
cessors of  the  chief  of  the  apostles  and  the  inheritors  of  his 
supreme  authority.    The  churches  in  subjection  to  the  Church 

^  We  call  Fathers  of  the  Chur  h  distinguished  pastors  and  Doctors 
who,  particularly  in  the  first  centuries  after  the  time  of  the  apostles, 
adorned  the  Church  by  their  learning,  their  doctrine,  and  their  virtue. 
The  name  of  Doctor  is  specially  given  those  among  them  possessed 
of  greater  learning  and  authority.  Such,  in  the  Greek  Church,  were 
St.  Basil,  St.  Athanasius,  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  St.  John  Chrysos- 
tom;  in  the  Latin  Church,  St.  Gregory,  St.  Ambrose,  St.  Augustine, 
St.  Jerome,  St.  Leo,  St.  Thomas  Aquinas,  St.  Bernard,  and  in  later 
times  St.  Francis  de  Sales  and  St.  Alphonsus  Liguori.* 

'  Lacordaire,  conf.  9  on  the  Church. 

♦Harper,  L,  p.  250  ff.;  Hunter,  I.,  n.  98. 


342  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

at  Rome  and  forming  one  with  her  show  a  hke  series  of  lawful 
pastors  who  hold  their  mission  from  the  ApostoHc  See. 

Objection. — The  legitimate  succession  of  Roman  Pontiffs 
was  interrupted  several  times  by  schisms  and  by  the  long 
sojourn  of  the  popes  at  Avignon.^ 

Reply. — These  facts  in  no  way  interrupt  the  legitimate 
succession  of  the  supreme  heads  of  the  Cathohc  Church. 

1st.  During  the  schisms  there  was  always  but  one  legitimate 
pope,  even  though  his  authority  may  have  been  contested 
in  good  or  bad  faith  by  a  part  of  the  Church.  If  a  province 
revolts  against  a  prince,  does  he  cease  to  be  the  lawful  sov- 
ereign of  this  province  which  rightly  or  mistakenly  disputes 
his  authority?  As  to  the  great  schism  of  the  West  which  pre- 
sents the  greatest  difficulties,  we  have  dwelt  sufficiently 
upon  it  (p.  334). 

2d.  The  sojourn  of  the  popes  at  Avignon  did  not  prevent 
their  being  bishops  of  Rome  and,  as  such,  heads  of  the  entire 
Church:  a  prince  who  fives  outside  the  capital  of  his  gov- 
ernment does  not  forfeit  the  sovereignty  of  his  country. 

Conclusion  of  Article  II. 

The  Catholic  Church  possesses,  then,  all  the  notes  of  the 
true  Church;  and  as  only  one  Church  was  founded  by  Christ, 
this  Church  must  be  the  Church  of  Rome,  whose  mission 
is  to  lead  man  to  eternal  salvation.  After  the  preceding 
demonstration  the  two  articles  following  may  seem  useless. 
We  would  add  them,  however,  as  superabundant  proofs  so 
that  they  may  facifitate  the  return  of  erring  brethren  to 
the  fold  of  Him  who  is  the  Way,  the  Truth,  and  the  Life, 
and  who  earnestly  desires  that  there  be  but  one  Fold  and 
one  Shepherd. 

^  On  the  fable  of  Popess  Joan  see  Dollinger,  Fables,  etc.;  Parsons, 
II.,  ch.  3;  Alzog,  II.,  §185. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       343 


ART.    III.— PROTESTANTISM     DOES     NOT    POSSESS     THE 
NOTES   OF  THE   TRUE   CHURCH  OF  CHRIST.* 

There  is  really  but  one  serious  heresy  at  the  present  day, 
Protestantism.  Under  this  generic  name  we  include  all  who, 
accepting  revelation,  protest  against  the  authority  of  the 
Catholic  Church  and  claim  that  Scripture  is  the  only  source  of 
revealed  truth.  Protestantism,  in  fact,  is  not  a  definite 
religion.  The  innumerable  sects  which  it  includes  have  no 
other  bond  of  communion  than  the  same  negative  name 
which  belongs  alike  to  all  heresy,  no  other  principle  of  life 
than  the  dogmas  and  precepts  which  they  have  preserved 
from  the  Catholic  Church  from  which  they  separated. 

Historical  Notice. — Let  us  say  a  few  words  of  the  first 
authors  of  Protestantism.^  Martin  Luther  was  born  at 
Eisleben  in  Saxony  in  1483.  He  embraced  the  religious 
life  in  the  Augustinian  convent  of  Erfurt  and  was  sent  by 
his  superiors  to  the  University  of  Wittenberg,  where  he 
taught  theology.  He  was  particularly  remarkable  here  for 
his  love  of  novelties  and  his  indomitable  pride.  In  1517 
Leo  X.  intrusted  the  preaching  of  certain  indulgences  to 
the  Dominicans.  The  preference  shown  another  order  prob- 
ably offended  Luther,  who  was  of  a  lively  imagination 
and  passionate  nature.  He  began  by  violently  attacking 
what  he  called  the  preachers^  abuses  and  exaggeration  in 
language,   and  was   soon  led   into   attacking  the  doctrine 

*  In  this  and  the  following  article  consult  the  corresponding  ref- 
erences given  in  the  preceding  articles  of  this  chapter. 

^  On  Luther  see  Anderdon  ;  Audin;  Dollinger ;  Stang  ;  Verres  ; 
Murphy,  ch.  22;  Parsons,  Studies,  HI.,  ch.  18;  A  C.  Q.  viii.  689,  ix. 
551 ;  D.  R.  Old  Ser.  xxxix.  1 ;  M.  xlix.  305-457.  On  Calvin  see  Parsons, 
1.  c,  ch.  21;  C.  W.  xxxvii.  769;  D.  R.  Old  Ser.  xxix.  30;  De  Trevem, 
1.  2,  app.  2.  On  Wyclif  see  Stevenson,  S.J.;  Parsons,  Studies,  II.,  ch. 
41 ;  D.  R.  Old  Ser.  xxxv.  382.  On  Wesley  see  D.  R.  New  Ser.  xxiii.  87. 
On  Henry  VIII.  see  Gasquet,  O.S.B.  (also  M.,  July  '82  ff.),  and  Ken- 
rick,  Vindication.  On  Knox  see  Spalding,  Hist,  of  Ref.,  II.,  pp.  228 
and  489.  On  Huss  see  Spalding,  Miscell.,  I.,  essay  10;  Parsons,  1.  c.J 
III.,  ch.  1.    In  general  see  Works  on  Church  History. 


344  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS 

of  indulgences  itself  and  the  right  to  grant  them.  Then, 
carried  on  by  the  consequences  of  a  first  false  principle,  he 
went  from  one  error  to  another.  From  this  time  forward  we 
find  in  his  writings  addressed  to  the  people  the  principle 
which  was  to  play  so  important  a  role  in  his  doctrinal  system: 
faith  alone  obtains  the  remission  of  sin.  After  long  and 
patient  efforts  on  the  part  of  Leo  X.  to  win  him  back  to 
truth  and  obedience,  a  bull  of  excommunication  was  issued 
against  the  rebellious  monk.  Far  from  submitting,  the 
heresiarch  consummated  his  rebellion  by  causing  the  bull 
to  be  burned  publicly  at  Wittenberg,  and  Protestantism 
found  its  first  apostle.  Eight  years  later  he  married  an 
ex-nun  called  Catherine  Bora.     He  died  in  1546. 

Unbridled  love  of  false  liberty,  covetous  desire  for  ecclesi- 
astical spoils,  a  moral  teaching  which  gave  free  rein  to  the 
passions,  the  abolition  of  ecclesiastical  celibacy,  the  unheard- 
of  violence  exercised  toward  those  who  desired  to  remain 
faithful  to  the  faith  of  their  fathers,  together  with  other 
causes,  secured  him  a  large  number  of  followers. 

Shortly  after  Luther,  Zwinglius  began  to  dogmatize  in 
Switzerland,  and  Calvin  in  Geneva.  Their  doctrines  are 
far  from  being  in  accord  with  those  of  Luther,  but  they  all 
agree  in  contradicting  the  teaching  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
and  according  great  freedom  to  the  passions.  As  to  Henry 
VIIL,  King  of  England,  we  know  how,  after  writing  against 
Luther  and  obtaining  the  title  of  ''Defender  of  the  Faith," 
he  led  his  people  into  schism.  He  sought  from  the  Pope 
authority  to  gratify  his  uncontrolled  passions.  As  the  Pope 
refused  to  second  his  criminal  desires  by  sanctioning  his 
divorce  from  Catherine  of  Aragon,  his  faithful  wife,  he 
abandoned  the  Church  of  Rome  and  had  himself  proclaimed 
head  of  the  Anglican  Church  (1534).  Heresy  was  soon 
grafted  upon  schism. 

We  have  no  need  to  insist  further  on  these  well-known 
facts,  but  let  us  demonstrate  that  Protestantism  has  none 
of  the  positive  notes  of  the  true  Church  of  Christ. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       345 

I.  Protestantism  is  Absolutely  Devoid  of  Unity. 

A.  It  Lacks  Unity  of  Doctrine. — a.  There  was  no 
agreement  whatever  in  matters  of  doctrine  among  the  first 
founders  of  Protestantism,  and  their  doctrinal  divergences 
became  more  and  more  marked.  In  fact  they  have  in- 
creased to  such  a  degree  that  it  is  almost  true  to  say  that 
the  diversity  of  principles  in  the  Church  equals  that  of 
individuals.  Luther  himself  acknowledged  this  in  1525. 
''There  are,"  he  wrote, ''almost  as  many  sects  and  behefs 
as  there  are  individuals.  One  will  not  admit  baptism; 
another  rejects  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar;  this  one  places 
another  world  between  this  present  world  and  the  day  of 
judgment;  that  one  teaches  that  Christ  is  not  God.  There 
is  no  one,  however  ignorant,  who  may  not  claim  to  be  inspired 
by  the  Holy  Spirit  and  give  forth  his  imaginings  and  his 
dreams  as  prophecies. "  With  time  the  diversity  has  become 
only  more  wide-spread.  The  number  of  sects  existing  in  com- 
plete independence  one  of  another  can  no  longer  be  esti- 
mated. According  to  the  official  reports  there  are  at  present 
in  the  United  States  fifty-six  principal  sects,  which  with  the 
secondary  sects  make  two  hundred  and  twenty-eight.  In 
the  city  and  suburbs  of  London  alone  there  are  more  than 
one  hundred  different  sects,  and  in  each  sect  the  various 
professions  of  faith  succeed  one  another  Hke  leaves  on  the 
trees.  Thus  a  Protestant  minister  of  Kiel,  Harms,  did  not 
hesitate  to  say  that  he  could  imdertake  to  write  on  his 
thumb-nail  all  the  doctrines  uniformly  accepted  by  his 
brethren. 

h.  Not  only  were  the  leaders  of  the  Reformation  far  from 
agreeing  in  their  rehgious  tenets,  but  each  one  changed  his 
religious  opinions  without  the  slightest  difficulty,  alternately 
accepting  and  rejecting  points  of  doctrine  according  to  the 
needs  of  the  moment.  Luther  went  so  far  as  more  than  once 
to  threaten  his  followers  to  retract  all  his  innovations  if 
they  persisted  in  annoying  him  and  creating  difficulties. 


346  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

According  to  Melanchthon  himself,  the  most  moderate  of  all 
the  apostles  of  the  Reformation,  ''the  articles  of  faith  should 
be  frequently  changed  and  should  be  based  upon  the  character 
of  the  times  and  circumstances." 

c.  This  variation  in  the  behef  of  the  early  reformers  and 
of  their  followers  of  the  present  day  need  not  astonish  us; 
it  is  a  necessary  consequence  of  the  Protestant  rule  of  faith. 
In  fact  Protestants  reject  the  Cathohc  principle  of  the 
authority  of  the  Church  divinely  charged  to  interpret  in- 
falhbly  Holy  Scripture  and  tradition.  They  claim  that 
the  Bible  alone,  interpreted  according  to  the  reason  of  the 
individual,  teaches  each  one  what  he  is  to  beheve.  It  is  not 
difficult  to  see  whither  this  dissolvent  principle  may  lead.^ 
Thus  it  furnished  Bossuet  in  the  century  immediately  follow- 
ing the  Reformation  matter  for  his  masterpiece,  the  "  History 
of  the  Variations  of  the  Protestant  Church." 

Remark. — Despite  this  so-called  rule  of  faith,  the  majority 
of  Protestants  obey  in  reality  any  minister  who  has  the 
address  to  make  himself  heard  and  to  secure  the  suffrage 
of  a  certain  number.  But  such  authority,  besides  being 
purely  human,  as  well  as  contrary  to  the  fundamental  principle 
of  their  rule  of  faith,  can  hardly  fail  to  produce  diversity  of 
beliefs.  Why  should  there  be  more  conformity  among  the 
teachers  than  among  their  flocks? 

d.  Worship  being  only  an  expression  of  faith,  and  diversity 
of  belief  entailing  necessarily  diversity  of  rites  and  rehgious 
ceremonies,  it  must  introduce  in  Protestantism  great  variety 
of  practices  in  regard  to  sacraments,  sacrifices,  and  prayers. 
Thus  some  admit  and  others  reject  the  same  sacrament; 
and  among  those  who  admit  it  some  accept  it  in  one  sense, 
others  in  another.  Luther,  for  example,  reduced  the  number 
of  sacraments  from  seven  to  two.  Again,  according  to  the 
Lutheran  doctrine,  baptism  is  not  regenerating,  it  does  not 
produce  interior  sanctification ;  again,  justification  does  not 
mean  that  sin  is  really  effaced;  it  means  that  it  is  not  imputed 

See  Lacordaire,  conf .  27,  Cath.  Doct. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       347 

to  man,  that  it  is  covered  by  faith  in  the  merits  of  Jesus 
Christ.  As  to  the  Eucharist,  some  acknowledge  the  real 
presence  of  Jesus  in  the  sacred  Eost,  others  regard  it  only  as  a 
figure.  Luther,  though  forced  by  the  clearness  of  the  sacred 
text  to  admit  this  presence,  nevertheless  modified  the  Catholic 
dogma  concerning  it.  He  claimed  that  the  body  and  blood 
of  Jesus  Christ  are  not  present  by  the  conversion  of  the 
elements  of  bread  and  wine,  or  by  transubstantiation,  but 
that  they  are  present  under  and  with  the  bread  and  the  mne ; 
that  Christ  is  present  only  at  the  moment  we  receive  the 
Eucharist;  that  the  sacrament  was  instituted  only  to  be 
received  in  communion,  but  not  to  be  offered  as  a  true  ex- 
terior sacrifice.  Nor  do  our  opponents  differ  any  less  in 
the  administration  of  the  sacrament.  Finally,  some  adore 
Christ  as  God,  others  refuse  Him  the  homage  of  their  wor- 
ship ;  some  pray  for  the  dead,  others  condemn  the  practices. 

e.  Many  Protestant  churches,  in  order  to  preserve  a  shadow 
of  unity,  have  had  recourse  to  formulas  of  faith,  creeds,  or 
synodal  decrees.  Luther  himself,  in  direct  contradiction  of 
his  fundamental  rule  of  faith,  wrote  a  catechism;  he  even 
went  farther  and  declared:  ''There  is  not  an  angel  in  heaven, 
still  less  a  man  upon  earth,  who  may  and  who  dares  to  judge 
my  doctrine:  whosoever  will  not  adopt  it  cannot  be  saved; 
and  whosoever  believes  not  as  I  believe  is  destined  for  hell." 
There  could  hardly  be  a  more  formal  contradiction  of  private 
interpretation.  Many  of  his  followers  refused  to  accept 
either  the  formulas  or  decisions,  justly  observing  that  under 
such  conditions  they  had  better  have  remained  in  submission 
to  the  great  and  ancient  authority  of  the  Church  of  Rome. 
We  see  that  this  want  of  unity  is  an  absolutely  incurable 
evil  among  Protestants.  There  are  Protestant  sects,  but 
there  is  not,  there  cannot  be  a  Protestant  Church,  since 
they  have  no  common  faith,  no  unity  of  doctrine,  nor  any 
principle  of  such  unity. 

B.  It  Lacks  Unity  of  Ministry  or  Government. — 
Each  sect,  by  the  fact  that  it  possesses  a  belief  of  its  own, 


348  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

is  independent  of  all  the  others,  and  the  ministers  of  one 
have  not  the  right  to  interfere  in  the  ministry  and  govern- 
ment of  another.  What  is  more,  in  each  determined  com- 
munion the  ministers  are  in  reality  independent  of  one 
another.  It  is,  in  fact,  a  Protestant  principle  that  each  one 
lawfully  exercises  his  ministry  if  he  does  not  diverge  from  the 
doctrine  of  the  fundamental  articles.  But,  again,  who  has 
the  requisite  authority  to  define  these  articles? 

II.  Protestantism  does  Not  Possess  Holiness.* 

A.  It  is  Not  Holy  in  its  Founders. — 1st.  History 
represents  Luther  as  a  man  of  violent  temper,  addicted  to 
excesses  of  the  table,  and  trampling  under  foot  the  most 
solemn  engagements;  Calvin  as  an  impure,  vindictive 
character;  Zwinglius  as  a  debauchee,  as  he  himself  acknowl- 
edges; Henry  VIII.  as  an  adulterer  and  a  debauchee.  The 
morals  and  private  sentiments  of  Luther  as  revealed  in  his 
own  writings  will  not  bear  publication. 

2d.  The  reformers  authorized  the  most  revolting  crimes 
in  their  followers.  Luther,  in  servile  deference  to  a  crowned 
head,  did  not  dare  to  preach  against  polygamy,  and  even 
went  so  far  as  to  permit  bigamy  in  the  Landgrave  Philip  of 
Hesse;  the  permission  was  confirmed  by  seven  other  re- 
formers, and  Melanchthon  assisted  at  the  marriage. 

3d.  In  their  writings  and  conversation  they  show  them- 
selves men  of  ungoverned  temper,  corrupt  heart,  and  in- 
domitable pride.  At  the  least  resistance  they  broke  forth 
into  abusive  and  profane  language.  Luther's  language, 
particularly,  is  at  times  most  gross  and  revolting.^ 

^  On  the  Fruits  of  Protestantism  see  Spalding,  History  of  the  Ref- 
ormation, p.  in.,  IV.;  Evidences,  1.  7;  Spalding  J.  L.,  lect.  1;  Marcy, 
ch.  23  ff.;  A.  C.  Q.  ix.  70  (Puritans),  127,  xiv.  243;  Br.  W.  v.  244, 
xiv.  447;  C.  W.  xxxviii.  194  (in  England);  D.  R.  Old  Ser.  xiv.  379; 
III.  Ser.  xiv.  (in  Prussia). 

'  See  Jansen,  Verres,  O'Connor,  and  Audin,  also  our  remarks  upon 
Protestant  intolerance  below  in  Ch.  IV. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       349 

B.  It  is  Not  Holy  in  its  Doctrine. — Protestantism  has 
no  common  moral  teaching  binding  upon  all,  an>  more  than 
a  common  belief  which  all  are  obliged  to  accept.  Its  ad- 
herents claim  that  the  Bible  is  the  only  rule  of  morals  as 
well  as  belief,  and  as  each  one  is  allowed  to  interpret  it 
according  to  the  light  of  his  reason  there  is  nothing  to  prevent 
any  one  from  fashioning  his  own  moral  teaching:  he  may 
even  change  his  ethics  according  to  the  ever-varying  dis- 
position of  his  mind.  That  which  his  prejudice  of  to-day 
makes  him  read  in  the  Scriptures  may  appear  to  him  to- 
morrow in  an  entirely  different  light,  and  he  is  free  to  change 
his  conduct  according  to  his  convictions. 

Finally  (it  is  hardly  credible),  a  Protestant  is  not  obliged  to 
practise  what  he  reads  in  the  Scriptures,  however  clear  it 
may  be.  For  the  founders  of  the  Reformation  teach  that 
works  are  useless  and  even  injurious  to  salvation;  that 
faith  suffices  to  make  us  the  friends  of  God;  that  man  once 
justified  before  God  is  sure  of  being  saved,  whatever  crimes 
he  may  afterward  commit.  What  is  more,  that  it  is  even 
impossible  for  man  to  sin  since  he  is  not  free.  Luther  and 
Calvin  go  so  far  as  to  deny  the  existence  of  free-will  in  man. 
Luther  wrote  a  book  called  ''Slave  Will,"  which  may  be 
summed  up  thus:  ''God  is  the  author  of  the  evil  as  well  as 
the  good  in  us,  and  as  He  saves  us  without  any  merit  on  our 
part.  He  also  damns  us  through  no  fault  of  ours.  ...  All  that 
we  do  is  done,  not  freely,  but  through  pure  necessity."  (Works 
of  Luther,  vol.  ii.,  p.  435.)  Calvin  holds  the  same  language. 
"God,"  he  says,  ''for  incomprehensible  reasons  excites  men 
to  violate  His  laws.  His  inspirations  move  the  hearts  of 
sinners  to  evil.  Man  falls  because  God  has  so  ordered  it." 
(Instit.  Christ.,  bk.  vii.,  ch.  23.)  Again,  "God,"  says  Zwing- 
lius,  "is  the  first  principle  of  sin.  It  is  through  a  divine 
necessity  that  man  commits  all  crimes."  (De  Provid.  Ep., 
vol.  i.,  p.  355.) 

Let  us  give  a  few  other  texts  from  Luther,  for  they  are 
more  conclusive  than  argument.     "How  rich  is  the  Christian ! 


350  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

Even  if  he  would  he  could  not  be  disinherited  by  sin:  not  to 
believe  in  the  Son  of  God  is  the  only  sin  in  this  world.  Be- 
lieve, therefore,  and  you  are  sure  of  your  salvation.''  (Luther, 
'^ Captivity  of  Babylon.")  ''There  is  no  more  dangerous, 
more  pernicious  scandal  than  a  good  life  exteriorly  manifested 
by  good  works.  Pious  souls  who  do  good  to  gain  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  not  only  will  never  reach  it,  but  will  be  counted 
among  the  damned."  (Works  of  Luther,  vol.  vi.)  ''The 
Gospel  does  not  ask  our  works  for  our  justification;  on  the 
contrary,  it  condemns  these  works."  "Murder,  theft  are  not 
sins  so  great  as  to  wish  to  reach  heaven  through  good  works, 
which  are  the  things  most  prejudicial  to  salvation."  (Ser- 
mons inedits  publics  par  Mack.) 

This  same  inefp^acy  and  uselessness  of  good  works  is  taught 
by  Calvin  in  more  than  fifteen  different  parts  of  his  ''Insti- 
tutes of  the  Christian  Religion."  Such  a  doctrine  flows 
naturally  from  the  idea  those  innovators  had  of  justification 
or  righteousness.  Man  is  made  just  and  righteous,  they  said, 
without  any  internal  change  in  him;  it  all  consists  in  the 
gratuitous  and  merely  external  imputation  of  the  righteous- 
ness of  Jesus  Christ  to  the  Christian.  A  sinner  becomes  a 
just  man  by  the  mere  fact  that  God  deigns  to  consider  him 
covered  as  with  a  mantle  by  the  holiness  of  His  Son.  The 
moral  character  of  man's  conduct  does  not  enter  at  all  into 
the  conditions  required  for  the  friendship  of  God;  sin  amounts 
to  nothing,  provided  faith  remains  firm  and  strong.  "Be  a 
sinner  and  sin  stoutly,"  Luther  wrote  to  his  friend  Melanch- 
thon.  ..."  We  must  needs  sin  as  long  as  we  are  in  this 
world;  ...  sin  cannot  deprive  us  of  God,  even  were  we  to 
commit  in  the  same  day  a  thousand  adulteries  and  murders."  * 
Such  doctrine  is  evidently  the  destruction  of  the  very  principle 

^  Here  is  the  Latin  text :  "  Esto  peccator  et  pecca  fortiter,  sed 
fortius  fide  et  gaude  in  Christo  qui  victor  est  peocat',  mortis  et 
mundi.  Peccandum  est  quamdiu  hie  sumus.  Sufficit  quod  agnovi- 
mus  per  divitias  Dei  Agnum  qui  tollit  peccata  mundi:  ab  hoc  non 
avellet  nos  peccatum,  etiamsi  miUies  et  millies  uno  die  fornicemur  et 
occidamus."     (Works,  Jena,  1556,  vol.  i.,  p.  545.) 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       351 

of  morality.  If  it  were  true,  Jesus  Christ,  instead  of  coming 
into  the  world  to  deliver  us  from  sin  and  to  teach  us,  by- 
word and  example,  to  practise  all,  even  the  most  heroic 
virtues,  would  have  died  to  leave  us  free  to  live  with  im- 
punity in  crime. 

C.  It  is  Not  Holy  in  its  Influence  upon  Morals. — 
We  can  readily  divine  whither  a  doctrine  must  lead  which 
places  Robespierre  and  St.  Vincent  of  Paul  on  the  same 
level.  Why  should  man  trouble  himself  to  restrain  his 
evil  inclinations;  why  may  he  not  give  free  rein  to  his  pas- 
sions? It  is  not  astonishing,  therefore,  to  find  Calvin  pro- 
testing only  a  few  years  after  the  inauguration  of  the  quasi- 
reformation  that  ^' among  the  hundred  evangelists  hardly 
one  could  be  found  who  had  adopted  the  ministry  from  any 
other  motive  than  to  be  able  to  abandon  himself  with  greater 
liberty  to  all  kinds  of  voluptuousness  and  incontinency.'^ 
Luther  himself  was  soon  alarmed  at  the  fruit  of  his  teaching. 
''Our  Germany,"  he  says,  ''since  she  has  seen  the  Hght  of 
the  Gospel  almost  seems  to  be  possessed  by  the  devil.  .  .  . 
The  fear  of  God  has  disappeared;  it  is  a  deluge  of  vice  of  all 
kinds.  .  .  .  They  take  the  Gospel  for  a  gastronomic  doctrine 
which  teaches  one  to  get  drunk  and  to  eat  to  bursting.  This 
is  the  actual  opinion  of  all  without  distinction.  .  .  .  Wlio 
among  us  would  have  entered  upon  this  ministry  could 
we  have  foreseen  the  numerous  calamities  and  scandals  it 
would  breed?  Now  that  we  have  begun  we  must  abide  by 
the  consequences."  (Luther's  Works,  ed.  Walch,  vol.  viii.) 
And  again  he  says:  "I  admit  that  my  doctrine  has  indeed 
given  rise  to  scandals.  I  shall  not  deny  that  the  new  state 
of  things  frequently  makes  me  tremble,  particularly  when 
my  conscience  reproaches  me  with  having  disturbed  the 
ancient  order  of  the  Church,  which  was  so  tranqml,  so  peaceful 
under  the  papacy,  and  with  having,  by  my  doctrine,  created 
discord  and  trouble."  ^  (Works,  vol.  ii.)  Such  avowals,  which 
we  could  multiply,  and  which  are  to  be  found  in  Janssen's 
^  See  Lacordaire,  conf .  23. 


352  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

History  of  the  German  People,  demonstrate  whether  God  is 
with  those  who  claimed  to  reform  the  Church  of  Rome. 
While  the  sects  of  the  Reformation  incurred  from  the  first  the 
severest  censures  and  bitterest  reproaches,  the  Fathers  of 
the  Council  of  Trent,  assisted  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  efficaciously 
remedied  by  wise  and  prudent  rules  the  abuses  which  had 
gradually  crept  into  ecclesiastical  discipline. 

III.  Protestantism  does  Not  Possess  Catholicity. 

It  is  only  too  evident  that  Protestantism  is  not  universal 
either  as  regards  time  or  place.  It  began  only  in  the  six- 
teenth century;  and  even  in  the  countries  where  it  has 
penetrated,  though  it  bears  a  generic  name,  it  is  in  reality 
divided  into  a  multitude  of  sects  completely  independent 
of  one  another,  separated  even  by  specific  names,  and  fre- 
quently bitter  enemies,  having  no  other  bond  than  their 
common  hatred  of  the  Catholic  Church.  How  can  they 
form  but  one  rehgion  when  they  have  not  and  cannot  have  a 
body  of  truths  uniformly  taught  everywhere?  Uniformity 
of  belief,  binding  upon  all,  would,  moreover,  be  a  contradic- 
tion of  their  fundamental  principle,  private  interpretation 
of  the  Bible.  Not  only  does  no  fraction  of  Protestantism 
approximate  in  numbers  to  the  Catholic  Church,  but  the 
sum  of  all  its  adherents  does  not  equal  the  number  of  the 
Catholic  faithful. 

IV.  Protestantism  does  Not  Possess  Apostolicity. 

A.  It  IS  Not  Apostolic  in  its  Doctrine. — This  we  have 
superabundantly  proved.  Where  is  the  apostolic  doctrine 
imposed  as  of  faith  upon  all?  The  apostles  evidently  did  not 
receive  from  Christ  and  transmit  to  their  successors  the 
varied  and  frequently  contradictory  opinions  which  divide 
Protestant  sects. 

B.  Nor  is  it  Apostolic  in  its  Ministry. — How  can  the 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       353 

founders  of  Protestantism  hold  their  authority  from  the 
apostles,  they  who  revolted  against  the  successors  of  the 
apostles,  and  preached  a  doctrine  opposed  to  that  which  had 
been  believed  for  centuries?  In  truth,  Luther,  Calvin,  and 
the  other  leaders  of  Protestantism,  reahzing  the  necessity  of 
justifying  their  revolt,  claimed  to  have  received  what  they 
called  their  mission  of  reformation  from  the  apostles.  But 
the  authority  to  alter  or  perfect  a  divine  work  must  rest  upon 
something  more  than  an  affirmation.  Christ  Himself  felt 
obliged  to  give  abundant  proofs  of  His  mission.  The  re- 
formers should  have  furnished  at  least  a  few  miracles  to 
credit  their  mission  to  the  people.  Luther  was  deeply 
sensitive  to  the  need  of  such  proof,  and  sorely  perplexed  how 
to  furnish  it.  Sometimes  he  said  he  held  his  mission  from 
the  magistrate  of  Wittenberg,  sometimes  from  his  dignity 
of  doctor.  In  the  space  of  twenty-four  years  he  changed 
his  opinion  on  this  point  fourteen  times. 

The  truth  is,  no  one  has  received  or  ever  will  receive  such 
a  mission.  We  have  seen  that  the  apostles  received  the 
mission  to  teach  all  men,  to  preserve  all  that  Jesus  Christ  had 
confided  to  them ;  and  St.  Paul  pronounced  anathema  against 
any  one,  were  he  an  angel  from  heaven,  who  wo  aid  teach 
any  other  doctrine  than  that  of  the  apostles.  Hence 
it  is  proved  that  it  was  on  their  own  authority  that  those 
so-called  reformers  arrogated  to  themselves  their  alleged 
mission.  And  the  Church  has  the  right  to  say  to  them: 
*'You  are  of  yesterday;  I  know  you  not." 

As  to  Anglicans,  though  their  bishops  possessed  the  power 
of  order,  which  they  do  not,  it  is  manifestly  evident  that  they 
have  not  the  power  of  jurisdiction.^  We  have  seen  (p.  329  f.) 
that  jurisdiction  is  transmitted  by  the  authority  in  whom 

^On  Anglican  Orders  see  Leo  XIII.  on  Anglican  Orders;  Estcourt; 
Breen;  M.,  Sept.  '94  ff.;  Sydney  Smith,  S.J.,  Reasons  for  Rejecting 
Angl.  Orders;  Brandi,  S.J.,  Last  Word  on  Anglican  Orders;  Ryan;  Gal- 
way,  S.J.;  Wiseman,  Essays,  v.  iii.  See  also  works  on  Continuity; 
also  the  interesting  collection,  The  Church  of  Old  England,  4  vols., 
C.  T.  S. 


354  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

it  is  vested,  and  according  to  the  canonical  law  in  force 
at  the  time  of  the  transmission.  Now  whom  do  Protestant 
pastors  succeed?  From  whom  and  how  have  they  received 
jurisdiction?  Certainly  not  from  Luther,  or  Calvin,  or 
Henry  VIII.  Nor  from  their  first  bishops,  who  abandoned 
the  Church  of  Rome  to  embrace  the  tenets  of  the  Reforma- 
tion. The  latter,  it  is  true,  received  jurisdiction  from  the 
Church  of  Rome;  but  Rome,  after  their  defection,  took  away 
the  subjects  she  had  confided  to  them,  having  as  much  right 
to  withdraw  them  as  she  had  to  give  them.^ 

Conclusion. — Protestantism,  therefore,  possesses  none  of 
the  characteristic  notes  with  which  Our  Saviour  marked 
His  Church;  the  work  of  the  innovators  of  the  sixteenth 
century  is  not  the  work  of  Christ;  it  is  not  the  edifice  built 
by  the  divine  Hand  to  shelter  the  elect  during  their  passage 
through  this  world. 

There  is  still  an  easier  means  of  setting  forth  most  clearly 
the  falseness  of  Protestantism,  namely,  by  showing  that  its 
rule  of  faith  is  absolutely  untenable  and  contrary  to  the  will 
of  Christ.  When  this  basis  is  overthrown  the  whole  edifice 
of  the  Reformation  crumbles  of  itself. 

Another  peremptory  and  at  the  same  time  easy  argument 
showing  the  illegitimate  birth  and  existence  o.^  Protestantism 
we  shall  find  in  the  primacy  bestowed  by  Christ  on  St.  Peter 
(see  below,  Art.  V.). 

V.    The  Protestant  Rule  of  Faith  Differs  from  that 

OF  Christ. 

The  Bible,  nothing  hut  the  Bible,  freely  interpreted  by  every 
one,  such  has  been  from  the  beginning  and  still  is  the  Protes- 
tant rule  of  faith. 

*  It  is  well  known  that  a  few  years  ago  certain  Anglicans  sought 
ordination  and  consecration  at  the  hands  of  the  Jansenist  bishop  of 
Utrecht  in  order  to  be  able  legitimately  to  ordain  and  consecrate 
others.  C.  W.  xviii.  686,  838;  D.  R.  Old  Ser.  xlv.  468;  A  C.  Q.  On 
the  schismatic  Church  of  Utrecht  see  Parsons,  IV.,  ch.  14. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.        355 

We  Catholics  profess  also  the  greatest  respect  for  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  but  we  receive  it  from  the  hands  of  the 
Church,  which,  in  virtue  of  her  infallibility,  guarantees  its 
inspiration.  Moreover,  with  the  Scriptures  we  receive  from 
the  same  hand  with  equal  veneration  Tradition,  that  is,  the 
word  of  God  not  contained  in  the  Sacred  Scriptures.  Finally, 
far  from  claiming,  like  Protestants,  that  every  one  has  the 
right  to  determine  the  meaning  of  Scripture,  far  from  de- 
claring every  man  the  judge  and  arbiter  of  his  belief,  we 
say  that  it  belongs  to  the  Church,  assisted  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  to  fix  the  catalogue  or  canon  of  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
to  determine  the  meaning  of  the  sacred  text  and  unerringly 
interpret  tradition.  In  a  word,  the  Catholic  Rule  of  Faith 
is  the  teaching  authority  of  the  Church,  her  living  and  in- 
fallible voice  and  doctrine. 

Thesis. — The   Protestant   Rule   of  Faith  is    Untenable.^ 

First  Argument. — This  rule  of  faith  is  contrary  to  the 
will  of  Christ,  and  condemned  by  Scripture  itself. 

a.  Protestants,  if  faithful  to  their  rule  of  faith,  must  prove 
to  us  by  clear  texts  from  Scripture  that  the  apostles  received 
from  their  divine  Master  the  command  to  write  the  teachings 
which  fell  from  His  lips.  Far  from  being  able  to  do  this, 
they  find  as  we  do,  when  they  read  the  Bible,  that  Christ, 
after  founding  His  Church  upon  Peter  and  the  twelve  apostles, 
did  not  say  to  them.  Go  distribute  Bibles,  but,  '^Go  teach  all 
nations,  jyreach  the  kingdom  of  God  to  them;  teach  them 
to  observe  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you;  he  that 
heareth  you  heareth  Me.^^ 

h.  Christ  giving  example  in  His  own  person  preached,  but 

^  On  the  Bible  as  the  rule  of  faith  see  Wiseman,  Lectures,  vol.  i.; 
Lockhart,  1.  c,  ch.  4  ff.;  Bp.  Shield,  The  Bible  against  Prot.;  Preston, 
Protestantism  and  the  Bible;  Humphrey,  S.J.,  Bible  and  Belief; 
Written  Word,  ch.  3  ff.;  Alnatt  in  C.  T.  S.  v.,  xiii.;  Kenrick,  Vindi 
cation,  1.  3,  4;  Hunter,  I.,  tr.  2,  ch.  2;  The  Bible  Question  fairly  tested 
(Baltimore);  Br.  W.  v.  352,  vi.  122,  165,  203,  275,  vii.,  viii.  373, 
418;  D.  R.,  Oct. '94,  313. 


356  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

He  wrote  nothing.  Nowhere  do  we  find  that  He  founded 
a  religion  to  be  taught  by  writing,  still  less  that  it  was  to 
be  done  exclusively  by  writing.  ''Christ/'  says  St.  John 
Chrysostom,  ''left  no  written  instructions  to  His  apostles; 
but  instead  of  books  He  promised  them  the  Holy  Spirit, 
who  would  inspire  them  what  they  should  say." 

c.  The  apostles,  to  whom  Christ  promised  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  would  recall  all  that  He  had  taught  them,  did  as  their 
Master  commanded  them.  It  was  by  preaching  that  faith 
was  propagated  in  the  world.  It  was  only  occasionally  that 
a  few  of  the  apostles  committed  their  teachings  to  writing. 
The  other  apostles  wrote  nothing,  and  yet  they  converted 
whole  nations.  It  was  only  at  the  end  of  the  first  century, 
about  sixty-seven  years  after  the  death  of  Christ,  that  the 
books  of  the  New  Testament  were  completed ;  yet  the  faithful 
could  not  have  been  without  a  rule  of  faith  during  all  these 
years.  Moreover,  the  sacred  writers  constantly  refer  to  a 
parallel  oral  teaching;  they  formally  declare  that  they  wrote 
only  a  very  small  portion  of  Our  Saviour's  teachings;  and 
they  exact  the  same  respect  for  what  they  taught  by  word 
of  mouth  as  for  what  they  had  written.  (2  John  v.  12.) 
"Stand  fast,  brethren,"  says  St.  Paul  to  the  Thessalonians, 
who  were  already  Christians,  "and  hold  the  traditions  which 
you  have  learned,  whether  by  word  or  by  our  epistle" 
(2  Thess.  ii.  14).  And  to  Timothy  (2  Tim.  ii.  2) :  "The  things 
which  thou  hast  heard  of  me  by  many  witnesses,  the  same 
commend  to  faithful  men,  who  shall  be  fit  to  teach  others." 

d.  It  is  well  known  that  we  have  no  biblical  authority, 
no  authority  but  tradition,  for  example,  for  the  substitution 
of  Sunday  for  the  Sabbath,  for  the  validity  of  baptism  ad- 
ministered by  heretics.  If  there  be  in  the  Church  a  certain 
and  unchangeable  rule,  followed  by  all  the  Fathers,  pro- 
claimed by  all  Councils,  and  observed  by  all  her  Doctors, 
it  is  assuredly  this:  To  follow  most  faithfully  the  command 
so  often  repeated  by  St.  Paul:  "  0  Timothy,  that  keep  which 
is  committed  to  thy  trust"  (1  Tim.  vi.  20).    Keep,  as  St. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.        357 

Vincent  of  Lerins  explains,  not  what  you  have  discovered 
yourself,  but  what  has  been  entrusted  to  you;  not  what  you 
have  yourself  invented,  but  what  has  been  handed  to  you  by 
others;  not  what  your  own  mind  has  told  you,  but  what  you 
have  learned  from  your  predecessors;  not  what  you  have 
established  by  your  individual  efforts,  but  what  you  have 
received  from  hand  to  hand,  by  a  public  and  official  tradition, 
whereof  you  are  not  the  author,  but  a  simple  guardian. 

Second  Argument. — ^This  rule  of  faith  is  condemned  by 
the  teaching  of  the  history  of  the  Church.  According  to 
the  testimony  of  St.  Irenseus,  there  were,  even  in  his  time, 
many  barbarous  nations  who  believed  in  Christ,  though 
paper  and  ink  were  imknown  among  them.  These  countries 
did  not  have  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  yet  the  same  saint 
attests  that  they  preserved  the  faith  pure  and  intact  by 
means  of  tradition.  Do  we  find  anywhere  in  the  history  of 
later  times  that  the  baggage  of  the  ministers  of  the  Church 
consisted  of  books  which  they  distributed  before  they 
preached?  How,  moreover,  would  this  have  been  possible 
before  the  invention  of  printing,  that  is,  during  the  fourteen 
centuries  when  copies  of  the  Bible  were  few  and  very  expen- 
sive? During  this  period  the  majority  of  the  faithful  had 
little  means  of  instruction  save  the  oral  teaching  of  the 
ministers  of  the  Church,  and  yet  they  were  Christians. 

From  all  that  we  have  said  it  is  evident  that  the  Church 
was  founded  without  the  Bible,  and  that  it  existed  before  the 
Bible.  The  gospels,  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  the  epistles, 
and  the  Apocalypse  did  not  form  the  Christian  communions 
or  the  Church,  but  they  were  addressed  to  these  communions 
already  formed.  Thus  St.  Augustine  had  good  reason  to 
declare  that  he  would  not  believe  the  Gospel  except  on  the 
authority  of  the  Catholic  Church.^ 

Third  Argument. — In  any  case,  if  the  Bible  freely  in- 
terpreted by  all  were  the  only  rule  of  faith,  very  large  classes 

^  Alnatt,  The  Church  and  the  Sects,  I.  Ser.,  1.  5. 


368  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

even  of  the  present  day  would  be  deprived  of  the  means  of 
salvation,  for  there  is  a  large  majority  that  cannot  read,  or 
whose  laborious  life  leaves  them  no  time  to  read.  And  yet, 
according  to  Protestant  teaching,  every  one  must  verify  for 
himself  the  inspiration  of  Holy  Scripture,  the  true  meaning 
of  each  verse,  as  well  as  the  authenticity,  integrity,  and 
fidelity  of  the  version  in  his  hands.  If  God  had  given  the 
Bible  as  a  rule  of  faith,  if  He  had,  as  Protestantism  insists, 
made  it  a  law  for  all  Christians  to  read  the  Bible  for  them- 
selves, He  would  have  made  the  entrance  to  the  Church,  to 
eternal  salvation,  impossible  for  nearly  all  men,  particularly 
for  the  poor.  Now  one  of  the  special  marks  which  Christ 
has  given  of  His  divine  mission  is  that  the  poor  shall  have 
the  Gospel  preached  to  them,  and  He  declares  them  His 
favorite  children  (Luke  iv.  18;  vii.  22). 

Fourth  Argument. — Without  the  authority  of  the  Church 
it  is  impossible  to  establish  the  full  canon  of  Scripture  and 
to  offer  to  the  faith  of  believers  a  clearly  and  positively 
defined  body  of  doctrine.  In  fact  Protestants,  even  the 
most  learned  among  them,  cannot  be  certain  that  the  Bible 
is  inspired,  that  is,  that  it  contains  the  word  of  God,  not 
simply  that  of  man.  Nor  can  they  be  certain  what  books 
form  part  of  the  Bible.  The  testimony  of  history,  the 
agreement  of  manuscripts,  criticism,  furnish  only  a  human 
authority,  upon  which  it  would  be  impossible  to  make  an  act 
of  divine  faith.  Criticism,  moreover,  has  led  Protestants 
to  cut  off  successively  from  the  list  of  the  sacred  books 
nearly  all  the  books  of  the  Old  and  the  New  Testament; 
and  many  of  them  even  deny  that  any  part  of  the  Scrip- 
ture is  inspired.^ 

^  Protestants  reproach  the  Catholic  Church  with  not  allowing  all 
the  %ithful  to  read  the  Bible.  But  it  was  precisely  because  of  the 
abuse  which  the  Waldenses,  Albigenses,  and  particularly  Protestants 
made  of  the  sacred  text,  more  especially  since  the  world  has  been 
flooded  with  false  versions,  that  the  Church  was  obliged,  for  the 
protection  of  her  children,  to  make  wise  restrictions  concerning  the 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.        359 

Conclusion. — The  following  simple  dilemma  suffices  to 
prove  the  falseness  of  Protestantism:  During  the  first  period 
of  its  existence  either  the  Church  of  Christ  was  buried  in 
error  or  it  had  preserved  the  integrity  and  purity  of  its 
doctrine.  In  the  first  case,  the  promises  which  guaranteed 
the  stability  and  perpetuity  of  the  Church  were  not  fulfilled, 
consequently  the  Author  of  these  promises  was  not  God  nor 
was  He  sent  by  God.  Hence  we  have  no  need  to  concern 
ourselves  with  His  work,  still  less  with  the  work  of  Luther 
or  Calvin.  If,  on  the  contrary,  the  Church  of  Christ  re- 
mained pure  in  its  doctrine,  this  Church  was  the  Church  of 
Rome  or  it  was  another.  If  it  was  another  church.  Protes- 
tantism ought  to  have  allied  itself  with  that  other  Christian 
society,  which  was  the  true  Church.  Now  this  it  did  not 
do.  If  this  true  Church  was  the  Church  of  Rome,  then 
Protestantism  had  no  right  or  reason  to  separate  from 
her,  and  in  rebelling  against  her  it  proclaimed  its  own  ille- 
gitimacy. 

May  our  separated  brethren  remember  that  their  ancestors 
were  Catholics,  and  that  in  adopting  the  Catholic  faith  they 
are  not  changing  to  a  new  religion;  they  are  only  returning 
to  the  bosom  of  the  Church  which  their  fathers  unfortunately 
abandoned  three  centuries  ago. 

reading  of  the  Scriptures.  These  restrictions,  it  must  be  borne  in 
mind,  refer  only  to  the  Bible  translated  into  the  vernacular;  even 
then  it  is  not  prohibited  when  the  version  is  approved  by  the  Apos- 
tolic See,  or  when  it  is  published  with  notes  from  the  Fathers  or 
learned  Catholic  authors.* 

♦Besides  the  authors  mentioned  in  note  p.  355,  see  also  Clarke,  S.J.,  The  Pope  and 
the  Bible;  Br.  W.  vi.  212.  232,  vii.237;  D.R.OldSer.  xxiii.  145;  M.  Ixiv.  480,  Ixv.  1; 

C.  W.  Ivii.  20,  Iviii.  587.  On  the  Bible  before  the  Reformation  see  Alnatt,  Which  is 
the  True  Church?,  p.  38;  *  Buckingham,  The  Bible  in  the  Middle  Ages;  *  Maitland, 
Dark  Ages;  C.  W.  xxvii.  359;  Murphy,  ch.  30.  On  English  Catholic  versions  see 
Gasquet,  Pre- Reformation  Bible;  Card.  Newman,  Tracts,  etc.,    n.  6;  C.  W.  xii.   149; 

D.  R.  i.  367,  ii.  475,  iii.  428,  July  '94,  p.  122.  On  Protestant  versions  see  A.  C.  Q.  iv. 
123,  344,  521,  V.  701. 


360  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 


ART.   IV.— THE  SCHISMATIC   GREEK  CHURCH  DOES  NOT 
POSSESS  THE  MARKS  OF  THE  TRUE  CHURCH. 

Remarks. — 1st.  We  have  not  to  concern  ourselves  here 
with  the  various  heretical  sects — Nestorians,  Jacobites,  or 
Eutychians — which  arose  in  the  East,  and  which  existed 
long  before  the  Greek  schism.  It  is  too  evident  that  these 
religious  factions,  the  origin  and  authors  of  which  are  known 
to  us ;  which  were  formally  condemned  in  Ecumenical  Coun- 
cils; which,  far  from  possessing  unity  of  faith  and  communion, 
are  enemies  one  of  another;  which  are  limited  to  certain 
countries  and  have  no  power  of  expansion,  cannot  be  the 
true  Church  of  Christ. 

2d.  We  must  beware  of  confounding  the  Schismatic  Greek 
Church  with  the  United  Greek  Church,  which,  though  it  has 
a  special  liturgy  of  its  own  and  differs  from  us  in  matters  of 
discipline,  forms  part  of  the  Catholic  Church.  It  is  im- 
portant to  remark  here  that  the  Church  has  at  all  times 
authorized  customs  proper  to  certain  nations  for  the  celebra- 
tion of  the  divine  office  and  the  administration  of  the  sacra- 
ments, when  these  customs  were  not  contrary  to  the  dogmas 
of  faith.  Thus  the  General  Council  of  Florence,  in  the 
memorable  act  publishing  the  solemn  reunion  of  the  two 
Churches,  decreed  that  the  customs  of  each  one  should  be 
preserved  unchanged.  And  Benedict  XIV.,  following  the 
example  of  several  of  his  predecessors,  severely  prohibited 
changing  from  one  rite  to  the  other,  and  he  demonstrated 
in  his  encyclical  that  Rome  had  always  endeavored  to  pre- 
serve the  Oriental  rite  intact  and  had  forbidden  the  mingling 
of  customs  and  the  changing  from  one  rite  to  the  other. 
This  was  also  the  line  of  conduct  pursued  by  Pius  IX.,  and 
such  also  has  been  that  of  Leo  XIII.  Therefore  we  see 
how  vain  is  the  fear  entertained  on  this  point  by  Greek 
schismatics,  jealous  of  preserving  their  ancient  customs. 

Historical  Notice. — Under  the  generic  name  of  Schismatic 
Greek  Church  are    included  the  various  religious  factions, 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       361 

issues  of  the  great  schism  of  the  East  begun  in  the  ninth 
century  by  Photius,  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  but  which 
was  not  really  consummated  until  the  eleventh  century, 
thanks  to  the  ambition  of  Michael  Cerularius,  one  of  his 
successors  (1054).^ 

Before  Constantine  chose  Byzantium  for  his  new  capital 
the  episcopal  see  of  that  city  was  dependent  upon  the 
Metropolitan  of  Heraclea.  But  hardly  had  this  city  re- 
ceived from  the  great  emperor  the  title  of  second  Rome, 
eldest  and  cherished  daughter  of  old  Rome,  than  ambition 
awoke  in  the  hearts  of  its  bishops.  Proud  of  the  favor  which 
they  enjoyed  at  court,  and  abusing  the  Third  Canon  of  the 
Council  of  Constantinople  (381),  which  conferred  upon  the 
Bishop  of  Byzantium  "the  primacy  of  honor  after  the  Bishop 
of  Rome,"  they  hastened  to  claim  primacy  of  jurisdiction 
which  had  always  belonged  to  the  sovereign  Pontiff,  claiming 
that  Constantinople  ought  to  be  as  exalted  and  glorious  in 
ecclesiastical  affairs  as  in  political.  John  the  Faster  (583) 
first  assumed  the  title  of  ecumenical  or  universal  patriarch,  and 
preserved  it  despite  the  vigorous  protestations  and  adjura- 
tions of  Pelagius  II.  and  St.  Gregory  the  Great. 

Let  us  remark  here  with  Pope  St.  Leo,  who  as  early  as 
the  fifth  century  had  to  protest  against  the  usurpation  by 
Byzantine  prelates  of  the  rights  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  that 
"the  presence  of  the  emperor  may  constitute  a  royal  resi- 
dence, but  it  does  not  create  an  apostolic  see ;  divine  things 
not  being  regulated  after  the  manner  of  human  affairs."  ^ 

^  See  Church  Histories.  On  the  Greek  schism  see  also  Murphy, 
eh.  8;  Tondini,  The  Pope  of  Rome;  Preston  (Ch.  Unity);  Spalding, 
J.  M.,  Miscell.  xxxi.;  Parsons,  Studies,  II.,  ch.  4,  9;  Allies,  Per  Crucem, 
I.,  p.  46;  C.  W.  iii.  1,  X.  758;  D.  R.  Old  Ser.  xvii.  447,  xxiii.  406,  III.  Ser. 
iv.  22;  A.  C.  Q.  xxvii.  675  ff.  On  Nestorians  see  D.  R.  Old  Ser.  xiv.  122. 
On  the  Copts,  ib.  xxviii.  314,  New  Ser.  i.  33.  On  Armenians,  D  R. 
Old  Ser.  vii.  333;  C.  W.  Ix.  212.  On  Maronites,  D.  R.  Old  Ser.  xviii. 
43.  On  the  Abyssinians,  D.  R.  New  Ser.  i.  30.  On  the  Portuguese 
Schism  in  India,  D.  R.  Old  Ser.  xxvi.  179,  Jan.  '93,  p.  27. 

^  The  principle  invoked  by  St.  Leo  is  so  obvious  that  even  the 


362  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

It  is  evident  that  if  the  contrary  principle  were  ever  ad- 
mitted, if  we  were  obUged  whenever  a  poUtical  change 
occurred  in  a  country  to  make  corresponding  changes  in 
the  order  of  the  Church's  hierarchy,  we  should  be  logically 
forced  to  say  that  Christ  built  His  Church  upon  shifting 
sands,  and  not,  as  He  affirms,  upon  a  foundation  against 
which  even  the  gates  of  hell  cannot  prevail.  In  fact  a 
handful  of  soldiers  or  the  caprice  of  a  sovereign  would 
suffice  to  raze  the  divine  edifice  to  the  ground. 

Notwithstanding  the  increasing  ambition  of  the  bishops  of 
Constantinople  the  Pope's  confirmation  of  every  new  pa- 
triarch continued,  before  as  well  as  after  Photius,  to  be 
regarded  as  indispensable,  or  at  least  of  great  importance 
as  establishing  the  orthodoxy  of  the  newly  elected  bishop. 
Thus  Photius  himself,  though  he  usurped  the  see  of  Con- 
stantinople, did  not  fail  to  send  an  embassy  to  Rome  to 
ask  Pope  Nicholas  I.  to  confirm  him.  Photius's  letter  to  the 
sovereign  Pontiff  contained  a  profession  of  orthodox  faith 
for  which  he  was  commended  by  the  head  of  the  Church,  but 
the  confirmation  was  refused,  and  the  usurper  excommuni- 

clergy  of  Constantinople  still  follow  Catholic  traditions  on  this  point. 
We  know,  in  fact,  that  the  metropolitans  of  Chalcedon,  Ephesus, 
Nicomedia,  Heraclea,  Cyziciis  are  members  of  the  supreme  council 
of  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople  and  have  enjoyed  numerous  and 
important  privileges.  The  reason  of  this  is  that  these  cities  now 
only  unimportant  towns  or  villages  were  formerly  celebrated  places 
or  capitals  of  great  provinces.  If  the  vicissitudes  of  human  politics 
involve  corresponding  changes  in  the  ecclesiastical  hierarchy,  these 
metropolitans  should  long  smce  have  resigned  their  privileges  to  the 
bishops  of  Candia,  Smyrna,  Thessalonica,  Rhodes,  and  of  many  other 
cities.  Moreover,  if  the  Greek  schismatics  were  consistent,  if  the 
motive  alleged  by  John  the  Faster  had  a  reasonable  foundation,  the 
Bishop  of  Constantinople  should  long  since  have  resigned  the  title 
of  Universal  Patriarch,  for  Byzantium  has  ceased  for  centuries  to 
be  the  capital  of  the  Byzantine  empire.  The  ostentatious  title 
is  all  the  more  ridiculous  that  at  the  present  day  this  patriarch's 
jurisdiction  does  not  include  even  a  sixth  of  the  Christians  of  the 
Eastern  Church. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.        363 

cated  in  a  Roman  Council.  It  was  only  after  a  reconciliation, 
followed  by  a  new  excommunication  uttered  by  Pope  John 
VIII.,  that  Photius  removed  his  mask  and  threw  off  what 
he  called  the  yoke  of  Rome.  Then,  to  give  his  revolt  a  sem- 
blance of  reason,  he  claimed  that  the  popes,  by  tolerating 
the  addition  of  the  w^ord  Filioque  to  the  Nicene-Constanti- 
nopolitan  creed,  had  become  heretical.  It  is  worthy  of 
remark,  however,  that  this  protest  was  never  made  imtil 
four  hundred  years  after  the  addition  of  the  word.  Also 
that  it  was  only  later,  after  the  separation,  that  the  dispute 
concerning  the  opportuneness  of  the  addition  of  the  word 
Filioque  degenerated  into  a  dogmatic  question  relative  to  the 
procession  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  clergy  of  Constantinople 
claiming  that  the  Holy  Spirit  proceeded  only  from  the 
Father.! 

After  Photius  the  two  churches  remained  united  until  the 
time  of  Michael  Cerularius  (1054-1059),  who  renewed  the 
charges  formulated  by  Photius  against  the  Church  of  Rome, 
and  completed  the  separation  from  the  universal  Church. 
Later  a  reconciliation  was  effected  and  solemnly  proclaimed 
in  the  Council  of  Florence  held  in  1439  under  the  pontificate 
of  Eugene  IV.;  but  the  bad  will  of  the  clergy  of  Constanti- 
nople rendered  this  reconciliation,  which  would  have  been 
so  salutary,  almost  null.^ 

^  It  would  be  easy  to  prove  that  this  procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
as  the  Catholic  Church  teaches  it,  has  always  been  universally  be- 
lieved; it  was,  moreover,  authentically  recognized  by  the  Greeks 
in  the  Ecumenical  Council  of  Florence,  in  which  the  perfect  agreement 
of  the  Greek  and  Latin  Fathers  on  the  subject  of  this  dogma  has 
been  attested  by  both  parties.  In  the  Council  '  a  at  Toledo  in  448 
the  word  Filioque  itself  was  added  only  to  cu^  ^nort  the  heresy  of  the 
Sabellians  and  Priscillians,  who  used  the  ]y  ;ene  Creed  to  deny  that 
the  Holy  Spirit  was  consubstantial  with/  le  Father.  Hunter,  11. , 
n.  415.  .  J 

^  It  is  unnecessary  to  observe  th' '  x^is  union  of  the  two  churches 
established  by  an  Ecumenical  Council  still  exists  legally.  In  fact,  no 
later  Council  having  abrogated  or  modified  this  solemn  act,  signed 


364  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

The  Greek  schism  has  spread  through  Turkey,  Greece, 
Austria,  and  Russia;  but  the  importance  of  the  Russian 
nation  requires  that  we  give  a  few  special  details  of  the 
introduction  of  schism  into  this  country.^ 

It  would  be  a  great  mistake  to  suppose  that  this  vast 
country  was  won  over  to  schism  at  the  period  of  its  conver- 
sion to  Christianity.  It  was  only  at  the  end  of  the  tenth 
century,  when  the  Eastern  and  Western  churches  were 
united  in  faith  and  government,  that  Russia  received  in  a 
stable  and  definite  manner  the  benefit  of  the  Catholic  faith. 
It  owed  this  benefit  to  the  Princess  Olga,  regent  of  the  king- 
dom from  945  to  955.  Her  sincere  conversion  accelerated 
the  movement  toward  Christianity;  but  the  movement  was 
not  definite  and  complete  until  the  reign  of  her  grandson 
Wladimir  the  Great,  or  the  Apostolic.  The  zealous  prince 
brought  Greek  priests  to  teach  the  Russian  people  the 
principles  of  the  Christian  religion.  This  fact  explains  the 
great  influence  which  the  Byzantine  clergy  exercised  from 
the  beginning  over  this  neophyte  people — an  influence  which 
led  later  to  the  introduction  of  schism  into  the  powerful 
nation. 

As  a  matter  of  fact  the  present  religion  of  Russia  is  not 
more  Greek  than  Prussian  or  Anglican.  Though  at  the 
period  when  it  embraced  the  schism  it  had  a  metropolitan 
immediately  dependent  on  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople, 
it  has  long  since  broken  the  bond  which  united  it  to  this 
great  centre  of  the  schism  of  the  East. 

by  spontaneous  and  universal  consent,  it  preserves  to-day  its  legal 
and  canonical  force;  consequently  in  the  eyes  of  every  enlightened 
Greek  of  good  faith  the  sovereign  Pontiff,  the  successor  of  Peter,  is 
the  supreme  and  lawful  head  of  the  Eastern  as  well  as  the  Western 
Church. 

^  On  the  Russian  Schism  see  Palmer,  W.,  Visit  to  the  Russian  Church; 
Wallace,  Russia;  Gagarin,  The  Russian  Clergy;  A.  C.  Q.  xi.  505; 
D.  R.  Old  Ser.  xxiii.  406,  New  Ser.  xxviii.  277,  III.  Ser.  v.  422,  x.  K 
120,  Jan.  '93,  p.  1;  Tondini,  Future  of  the  Russian  Church;  Parsons, 
Lies  and  Errors,  p.  304;  C.  W.  Apr.  1900. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       365 

In  1589  the  Metropolitan  of  Moscow  was  raised  to  the 
patriarchal  dignity;  but  Peter  the  Great  suppressed  the 
patriarchate,  and  from  that  time  the  Russian  Church  has 
been  governed  by  the  so-called  Holy  Synod,  which  acts  in  the 
name  and  by  the  authority  of  the  emperor,  and  is  usually 
presided  over  by  an  officer  of  the  court.  Thus,  separated  not 
only  from  Rome  and  Constantinople,  but  from  any  patriarch 
whatever,  united  most  intimately  with  the  autocratic  govern- 
ment which  rules  all  the  Russias,  it  is  simply  the  national 
religion  of  Russia,  and  should  be  called  Muscovitism.^ 

It  is  not  surprising  that  the  Church  of  Russia  should  of 
late  years  assume  the  title  of  '^Orthodox."  Has  there  ever 
been  a  heretical  or  schismatic  sect  which  did  not  claim  to 
possess  the  true  doctrine?  Moreover,  we  readily  acknowledge 
that  the  entire  Greek  Church,  very  different  in  this  respect 
from  Protestant  sects,  has  always  preserved,  and  still  pre- 
serves unaltered,  almost  all  the  dogmas  of  faith  as  it  held 
them  before  the  separation,  and  as  the  Church  of  Rome 
teaches  them.  This  is  very  evident  from  the  institutions  of 
the  Greek  Church,  from  the  writings  of  the  Fathers  most 
revered  by  it,  from  the  prayers,  the  canticles,  daily  chanted 
in  the  offices  and  ceremonies  of  its  worship,  from  the  relig- 

*  Peter  I.,  by  the  institution  of  the  Holy  Synod  and  by  the  promul- 
gation of  ecclesiastical  rule,  destroyed  even  the  appearance  of  inde- 
pendence in  the  Russian  clergy.  His  successors  have  aggravated  the 
evil.  It  is  well  known  that  the  composition  of  this  synod  depends 
entirely  on  the  good  pleasure  of  the  emperor,  and  that  all  its  acts 
are  subject  to  the  approbation  of  a  minister  of  the  czar  bearing  the 
ftle  of  Procurator  of  the  Synod.  Moreover,  in  the  ecclesiastical  semi- 
naries and  academies  the  nomination  and  the  deposition  of  the  pro- 
fessors, the  choice  of  classic  works,  the  methods  of  teaching  are  all 
regulated  bj^  the  government.  Thus  Protestants  and  notorious  in- 
fidels have  held  professorships  in  the  institutions;  the  text-books 
adopted  were  for  a  long  time,  and  probably  still  are,  Protestant. 
One  can  readily  divine  what  must  be  the  fate  of  the  faith  of  clergy 
and  people  under  such  a  system.  There  is  no  reason  to  be  astonished 
at  the  great  progress  which  Protestantism  has  made  among  the 
Russian  clergy. 


366  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

ious  practices  and  traditions  of  the  people  belonging  to  the 
Eastern  rite/ 

I.  The  Greek  Church  has  Neither  Unity  of  Belief  nor 
OF  Ministry. 

A.  Unity  of  belief,  to  be  possible,  necessarily  requires  an 
authority,  a  tribunal  capable  of  giving  infallible  decisions 
in  matters  of  faith.  Now  the  Greek  Church  is  deprived  of 
such  a  tribunal.  Perhaps  it  will  be  said  that  the  Patriarch 
of  Constantinople  constitutes  such  a  tribunal.  But,  first  of 
all,  whence  does  the  patriarch  derive  his  authority?  Christ 
gave  but  one  head  to  His  Church,  and  this  head,  as  we  shall 
presently  show,  is  St.  Peter,  and  after  him  his  successors, 
the  bishops  of  Rome.  What  could  deprive  the  successor  of 
St.  Peter  of  his  divine  authority,  recognized  for  more  than 
eight  centuries,  and  cause  it  to  be  transferred  to  the  Patriarch 
of  Constantinople?  Certainly  not,  as  we  have  just  proved, 
Constantine's  choice  of  Byzantium  as  the  capital  of  his  new 
empire.  The  authority  which  the  Church  of  Rome  has 
received  immediately  from  Christ  resides  so  intrinsically 
in  her  that  no  Council  can  modify  or  alter  it. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  third  decree  of  the  first  Council  of 
Constantinople  (381)  which  raised  the  patriarch  of  this  city 
above  those  of  Alexandria,  Antioch,  and  Jerusalem,  ranked 
him  second  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome.     Now  it  is  important  to 

*  Protestants  are  frequently  heard  to  refer  triumphantly  to  the 
obstinacy  with  which  the  Greeks  have  persisted  in  their  schism  and 
in  their  hatred  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  totally  unconscious  that 
these  schismatics  witness  against  them.  In  fact  the  dogmas  which 
we  believe,  are,  with  but  little  difference,  publicly  taught  by  the 
Greek  Church.  Now  these  obstinate  enemies  evidently  did  not 
borrow  these  dogmas  from  the  Church  of  Rome  after  their  separation 
from  her.  Therefore  we  must  admit  that  they  have  always  been 
believed  in  the  East  as  well  as  in  the  West.  But  what  becomes,  then, 
of  the  accusation  of  inventing  new  dogmas  made  by  Protestants 
against  the  Church?  And  why  did  not  they  themselves  join  the 
Eastern  Church  when  they  revolted  against  Rome? 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       367 

bear  in  mind  that  the  Schismatic  Greek  Church  acknowledges 
the  authority  of  the  first  seven  Councils.  The  Greek  Schis- 
matics have  been  logically  forced  to  adopt  a  conciliary 
system.  They  admit  in  principle  that  in  doubtful  questions 
of  faith  the  patriarchs  united  in  council  have  the  right  to 
give  doctrinal  decisions.  But  no  such  assembly  of  patriarchs 
has  ever  been  convened  since  Michael  Cerularius.  In  doubt- 
ful points  of  dogma  recourse  is  had  to  the  first  seven  General 
Councils.  But  who  would  venture  to  affirm  that  all  points 
of  dogma  and  morals  were  fixed  in  these  early  Councils,  or 
that  they  could  possibly  settle  all  controversies  which  may 
arise  to  the  end  of  time?  Moreover,  there  is  an  evident 
contradiction  in  the  system  of  the  Greeks:  if,  as  they  allege, 
the  General  Councils  can  decide  doubtful  questions  in  matters 
of  faith,  on  what  ground  do  they  reject  the  authority  of  the 
Ecumenical  Councils  which  were  held  after  the  first  seven? 
Finally,  this  is  decisive :  if  it  is  true  that  the  first  seven  General 
Councils  furnish  the  reply  to  all  controverted  questions,  let 
them  cite  the  Ecumenical  Council  which  defines  that  the 
Holy  Spirit  proceeds  from  the  Father  alone. 

B.  As  to  unity  of  government,  there  is  no  trace  of  it  in  the 
Greek  Church.  The  dependence  of  the  patriarchs  of  Jerusa- 
lem, Alexandria,  and  Antioch  upon  the  Church  of  Constanti- 
nople is  merely  nominal;  that  of  the  Russian  Church  is  null. 
In  one  the  patriarchs  and  bishops  are  subject  to  the  head 
of  the  Turkish  empire,  in  the  other  the  Russian  Synod  is 
completely  controlled  by  the  czar.  Such  is  the  deplorable 
state  of  the  Eastern  Church.  It  would  be  difficult  to  recog- 
nize it  as  the  one  free  Church  which  Christ  founded  upon 
Peter,  the  one  fold  under  the  care  of  the  one  and  the  same 
shepherd;  or  to  believe  that  it  was  to  these  temporal  rulers 
that  Christ  addressed  the  divine  command:  "Feed  My 
sheep,  feed  My  lambs." 

It  is  evident  from  the  historic  sketch  that  the  only  bond 
which  unites  the  various  factions  forming  the  Schismatic 
Greek  Church  and  entitles  them  to  a  generic  name  is  their 


368  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

common  refusal  of  obedience  to  the  successors  of  St.  Peter 
in  the  see  of  Rome:  it  is  their  common  and  persistent  revolt 
against  the  religious  authority  established  by  Christ  Yet 
this  authority  of  Rome  was  recognized  by  the  Greeks  them- 
selves until  the  ninth  century,  or,  to  be  more  exact,  until 
the  middle  of  the  eleventh,  and  again  formally  accepted  by 
them  at  the  Council  of  Florence  in  1439. 


II.   The  Greek  Church  does  Not  Possess  Sanctity. 

Who  would  venture  to  say  that  the  authors  of  the  Greek 
schism  have  signalized  themselves  by  sanctity,  and  that 
their  revolt  against  the  lawful  and  ancient  authority  of  the 
see  of  Peter  was  founded  upon  virtuous  motives,  and  not 
upon  ambition  or  still  less  avowable  passions?  Undoubtedly 
among  the  million  schismatics  born  and  reared  in  good  faith 
in  the  Greek  Church,  who  have  with  Catholics  the  grace  of 
the  sacraments,  the  benefits  of  the  holy  sacrifice,  and  of 
devotion  to  the  Blessed  Virgin,  there  are  many  souls  pleasing 
to  God  and  worthy  of  His  favors.  But  where,  we  ask,  are 
the  saints  produced  by  this  Church  since  its  separation; 
where  the  men  of  constant  and  heroic  virtue  worthy  to  be 
compared  with  the  saints  of  the  Church  of  Rome?  By  what 
striking  and  incontestable  miracles  has  God  manifested 
the  heroic  virtue  of  persons  held  up  in  Russia  to  the  venera- 
tion of  the  masses?  We  refrain  from  speaking  of  the  moral 
degradation  and  the  vices  with  which  large  numbers  of  the 
Russian  clergy  are  charged.  If  such  things  are  the  result 
of  human  frailty  in  the  ministers  of  the  altar,  we  have  a  right 
to  expect,  at  least  on  the  part  of  the  ecclesiastical  author- 
ities, earnest  and  constant  efforts  to  raise  the  priesthood  from 
this  state  of  ignorance  and  abasement  and  render  it  less 
unworthy  of  the  respect  of  the  people. 


TPIE    CHURCH    OF   ROME    THE    TRUE  CHURCH.  369 

III.  The  Greek  Church  does  Not  Possess  Catholicity. 

Since  it  ceased,  by  its  revolt,  to  form  part  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  it  is  not  only  confined  to  a  few  countries  of  the  East 
and  to  Russia,  but  it  is  far  from  being  everywhere  the  same. 
As  to  the  Russian  Church  in  particular,  its  very  name  clearly 
demonstrates  that  it  is  not  the  Church  of  Christ,  for  Our 
Saviour  did  not  establish  national  Churches;  He  decreed, 
on  the  contrary,  that  there  should  be  but  one  fold  under  one 
shepherd.  If  the  Russians  claim  that  their  Church  forms 
part  of  the  Greek  Church,  it  is  contrary  to  all  evidence,  since 
no  hierarchal  tie  unites  the  two  Churches,  the  Patriarch  of 
Constantinople  being  no  less  a  stranger  to  the  Russian  Church 
than  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome.  We  are  aware  that  epistolary 
relations  are  now  established  between  the  Synod  of  St. 
Petersburg  and  the  schismatic  Greek  patriarchs.  But  we 
fail  to  see  in  what  way  these  recent  relations  essentially 
modify  the  present  situation,  and  particularly  in  what  way 
they  change  the  situation  which  existed  during  the  previous 
centuries.  Nor  is  this  schismatic  Church,  despite  the  immense 
territory  of  the  empire  which  protects  it.  Catholic  in  numbers. 
According  to  a  recent  census  the  schismatic  Slavs  number 
little  more  than  eighty  million.  Though  closely  united  by 
the  strongest  national  spirit,  they  are  far  from  possessing 
religious  unity.  Notwithstanding  the  iron  hand  of  the 
autocracy  which  endeavors  to  prevent  the  irruption  of 
schisms,  the  country  swarms  with  sects  of  every  kind,  known 
as  Raskolniks,  chief  of  which  are  the  Starowierzi,  or  "Men  of 
the  Old  Faith."  These  dissenters,  who  have  broken  with  the 
Holy  Synod,  just  as  the  Synod  broke  with  the  Patriarch  of 
Constantinople  and  as  the  latter  broke  with  Rome,  may  be 
counted  by  millions.  How  long  would  this  religious  body 
stand  if  the  temporal  power  which  holds  it  together  were  to 
withdraw  its  support  and  abandon  it  to  its  fate? 

The  spirit  of  proselytism  established  by  the  words  of  the 
divine  Master:  "Go  teach  all  nations,"  hardly  exists  in  the 


370  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

Russian  Chu/ch.  True,  every  year  the  Procurator  of  the 
Synod  submits  to  the  emperor  and  pubhshes  a  report  in 
which  a  special  chapter  is  devoted  to  propagandism.  There 
is  no  denying  that  the  number  of  recruits  increases  in  pro- 
portion as  the  empire  increases  its  frontiers;  but  this  is  not 
due  to  the  apostolic  devotion  of  its  missionaries,  or  to  the 
blood  of  its  martyrs.  The  first  page  of  its  martyrology  is 
still  unwritten;  but  to  make  amends  it  counts  by  millions 
the  unhappy  children  of  Catholic  Poland,  from  whom  it 
endeavors  to  wrest  their  faith  by  violent  and  persistent 
persecution. 

IV.  The  Greek  Church  does  Not  Possess  Apostolicity. 

Her  doctrine  varies,  hence  it  is  not  that  of  the  apostles. 
During  the  first  nine,  or  rather  eleven,  centuries  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  the  East  as  well  as  the  West  believed  in  the  primacy 
of  the  Pope  of  Rome  and  in  the  procession  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
as  we  ourselves  believe  and  teach  it.  Numerous  and  most 
convincing  proofs  of  this  are  to  be  found  in  Pitzipious' 
L'Eglise  Orientale,  and  in  the  Bibliotheca  grceca  orthodoxa  of 
Assemani.  The  Greek  Church  now  no  longer  admits  these 
two  dogmas,  hence  it  has  varied.  It  teaches  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  proceeds  from  the  Father  alone  and  that  He  rests  in 
the  Son;  it  makes  the  personal  distinction  between  the  Son 
and  the  Holy  Spirit  consist  in  the  mode  of  receiving  exist- 
ence, one  by  generation,  the  other  by  procession,  while 
denying  at  the  same  time  that  this  difference  comes  from 
any  relation  in  their  origin.^ 

Nor   have   they   preserved   apostolicity   of   ministry,   for 

*We  shall  not  speak  of  other  points  of  difference,  for  example 
purgatory.  In  reality  the  difference  between  the  two  churches 
here  consists  in  the  word  used  to  designate  this  place  of  expiation. 
The  schismatics  reject  absolutely  the  word  purgatory,  but  that  they 
admit  the  reality  of  a  place  of  temporary  expiation,  as  well  as  the 
efficacy  of  prayers  for  the  dead,  -s  manifestly  evident  from  their 
liturgy,  their  canticles,  and  their  religious  customs  and  institutions. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.        371 

their  revolt  against  the  authority  to  which  they  had  been 
submissive  for  so  many  centuries  broke  the  chain  which 
united  them  to  the  apostles  by  the  legitimate  transmission  of 
pastoral  jurisdiction. 


Conclusion. 

In  concluding  our  remarks  upon  the  Greek  schism  we  are 
happy  to  call  our  readers'  attention  to  the  movement  in- 
dicating a  return  toward  the  centre  of  Catholic  unity  which 
begins  to  be  manifested  in  the  Greek  Church.  This  is  so 
marked  that  the  historian  Pogodine  and  several  other  Russian 
writers  frankly  acknowledge  that  if  religious  liberty  were 
tolerated  in  Russia  half  the  orthodox  peasants  would  become 
Raskolniks,  who  are  very  powerful  despite  all  the  persecutions 
they  have  endured,  and  half  the  higher  classes  would  embrace 
Catholicism.  Quite  recently  a  learned  Russian,  who  is  not  a 
Catholic,  M  Soloviev,  son  of  the  celebrated  historian  of  the 
same  name,  addressed  to  an  archpriest  and  through  him  to 
all  the  prelates  of  the  separated  Eastern  Church,  a  series  of 
nine  questions  which  not  only  show  the  perplexities  and 
doubts  of  a  number  of  distinguished  minds  in  regard  to  the 
alleged  orthodoxy  of  the  schismatic  Church,  but  seem  to 
indicate  a  serious  step  toward  Catholic  unity.  It  is  curious 
also  to  read  in  Uidee  nisse,  a  work  of  this  same  Soloviev,  the 
very  significant  judgment  pronounced  upon  his  own  Church 
by  I.  S.  Aksakov,  one  of  the  heads  of  the  Russian  party  and 
a  declared  enemy  of  the  Church  of  Rome.  After  justifying 
his  statements  by  a  long  series  of  incontestable  facts  he 
concludes  his  examination  of  the  Russian  Church  thus: 
''The  spirit  of  truth,  the  spirit  of  charity,  the  spirit  of  life, 
the  spirit  of  liberty,  these  are  what  the  Russian  Church  is 
deficient    in"  (CEuvres   completes   dTvan  Aksakov,  t.  iv.). 

Let  us  redouble  our  prayers  that  this  Russian  people,  so 
remarkable  for  its  vigor,  its  religious  spirit,  and  its  patriotism, 
may  finally  understand  that  its  salvation,  from  a  social  as  well 


372  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

as  religious  point  of  view,  lies  in  the  Catholic  Church;  and 
that  it  may  be  convinced  that  no  sacrifice  is  asked  of  its 
national  pride;  that  the  popes  desire  less  than  ever  to  impose 
upon  it  the  rites  and  disciplinary  customs  of  the  Latin 
Church.  Only  recently  has  Leo  XIIL,  far  from  attempting 
to  Latinize  the  Catholics  of  Roumania,  constituted  himself  a 
sincere  and  earnest  defender  of  the  rites  and  customs  of  the 
ancient  Churches  of  the  East.  If  he  earnestly  desires  to 
bring  back  his  separated  children  to  the  faith,  it  is  with  no 
idea  of  injuring  or  weakening  their  national  and  religious 
traditions. 

After  all,  the  Russian  Church  has  only  to  unite  again  the 
broken  chain  of  its  ancient  traditions,  to  return  to  the  doctrine 
taught  it  by  the  first  apostles  of  the  Slavs,  St.  Cyril  and 
St.  Methodius,  consecrated  bishops  by  Pope  Adrian  II.; 
to  return  to  the  doctrine  of  the  most  illustrious  Doctors  of 
the  East,  of  Athanasius,  of  Gregory,  of  Chrysostom,  of 
Theodorus  the  Studite,  of  Cyril,  of  Ignatius,  all  of  whom 
remained  faithfully  united  with  the  see  of  Rome,  and  re- 
ceived its  teaching  and  decrees  with  filial  submission.  The 
Russian  Church's  claim  to  be  the  daughter  of  the  schismatic 
Church  of  Constantinople  rests  on  a  false  historical  basis. 
Her  true  mother  is  the  Catholic  Church,  formerly  acknowl- 
edged by  the  patriarchs  of  Constantinople,  as  well  as  by  the 
missionaries  who  brought  her  the  faith. 

We  may  fitly  end  this  article  by  giving  the  consoling  words 
of  Leo  XIII. 's  admirable  encyclical  to  the  Princes  and 
Peoples  of  the  Universe,  June  20,  1894:  ''We  cannot  give 
up  the  consoling  hope  that  the  time  is  not  far  distant  when 
the  Churches  of  the  Orient,  so  illustrious  by  the  faith  of  their 
ancestors  and  their  ancient  glories,  will  return  to  the  doctrine 
upon  which  they  parted  from  us.''  ''You  have  no  reason," 
he  further  tells  them,  "to  fear,  as  a  consequence  of  your 
return  to  Catholic  unity,  any  curtailment  of  your  rights,  of 
the  privileges  of  your  patriarchs,  or  of  the  rites  and  customs 
of  your  respective  churches.    For  it  has  always  been  and 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       373 

will  ever  be  the  intention  of  the  Holy  See,  as  it  has  been 
her  most  constant  tradition,  to  treat  all  nations  with  a  noble 
spirit  of  condescension  and  to  show  the  greatest  considera- 
tion for  their  origin  and  customs." 


ART.  v.— THE  PRIMACY  OF  THE  SEE  OF  PETER,  OR 
THE  PAPACY.^ 

This  question  belongs  naturally  to  the  chapter  which 
follows,  but  we  treat  it  here  because  the  primacy  of  the 
Roman  Pontiff  affords  a  new,  distinctive  mark,  easily  recog- 
nized and  sufficient  of  itself  to  distinguish  the  true  Church 
of  Christ  from  heretical  and  schismatic  sects. 

We  must  carefully  distinguish,  first  of  all,  the  primacy 
of  jurisdiction  from  primacy  of  honor,  or  primacy  of  directive 
authority. 

Primacy  of  honor  is  only  a  simple  right  of  precedence 
which  in  no  way  confers  the  right  to  govern  or  even  to  direct. 
The  primacy  of  directive  authority  is  that  of  the  president 
of  our  legislative  assemblies,  the  right  to  direct  the  discussion 
of  affairs.  The  primacy  of  jurisdiction  is  quite  another 
thing;  it  is  the  real  right  to  govern,  and  includes  the  triple 
power,  legislative,  judiciary,  and  coercive.  Such  is  the  pri- 
macy which  Christ  bestowed,  in  all  its  fulness,  upon  Peter, 
and  which  Protestants  deny  him. 

First  Thesis. — Christ  Conferred  upon  St.  Peter  the  Primacy  of 
Jurisdiction  over  the  Whole  Church. 

First  Argument,  drawn  from  the  Words  of  Christ. — 
Among  the  words  addressed  by  Our  Lord  to  St.  Peter  there 
are  some  which  contain  the  promise  to  confer  upon  him  the 
primacy  and  others  which  are  the  fulfilment  of  this  promise. 

*  Allies;  Alnatt;  Botalla;  De  Maistre;  Hettinger;  Humphrey;  Ken- 
rick;  Lindsay;  Murphy;  Preston;  Rivington;  Spald-ng,  J.  M ,  Evi» 
dences,  1.  11,  12;  Lockhart,  Old  Rel.,  ch.  8  ff.;  Hunter,  vol.  i.,  Schanz, 
III.,  ch.  12, 13;  A.  C.  Q.  xix.  691;  C.  W.  xxxv.  105. 


374  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

a.  The  Promise. — Jesus  having  asked  His  disciples  as- 
sembled about  Him  whom  they  thought  He  was,  Peter 
answered  in  his  own  name,  and  publicly  proclaimed  the 
divinity  of  his  Master,  ''Thou  art  Christ,  the  Son  of  the 
living  God,''  and  Jesus,  delighted  with  this  profession  of 
faith,  immediately  answered,  ''Blessed  art  thou,  Simon  Bar- 
Jona:  because  flesh  and  blood  hath  not  revealed  it  to  thee, 
but  My  Father  who  is  in  heaven.  And  I  say  to  thee:  that 
thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  My  Church, 
and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it."  (Matth. 
xvi.  15  ff.) 

It  is  very  evident  that  these  words,  than  which  nothing 
could  be  clearer,  were  addressed,  not  to  the  apostolic  college, 
but  to  Peter.  There  could  be  no  ambiguity  in  the  words 
of  incarnate  Wisdom,  particularly  when  there  was  question 
of  so  important  a  promise.  The  Master  spoke  to  be  under- 
stood, and  He  wished  that  there  should  be  no  misapprehension 
of  His  meaning.  That  Protestants  should  explain  these 
words  of  Our  Saviour  quite  otherwise  is  not  astonishing;  it 
is  a  case  where  the  letter  killeth  and  the  spirit  quickeneth.^ 

The  importance  of  the  question  itself  requires  that  we 
should  develop  it  somewhat.  Let  us  observe,  first,  that  the 
two  expressions,  "Thou  art  Peter"  (Petrus)  and  "upon  this 
rock  "  (petra),  both  apply  to  Peter.  The  Greek,  like  the 
Latin,  changes  from  the  masculine  to  the  feminine,  but  this 

^  It  is  well  to  remark  in  passing  that  Protestants,  following  their 
system  of  free  interpretation,  have  succeeded  in  discovering  in  this 
very  clea-  text  at  least  ten  not  only  different  but  contradictory  mean- 
ings. Some  say  that  Our  Lord  addressed,  not  Peter  individually, 
but  the  apostolic  college  represented  in  Peter.  In  truth  this  would 
have  been  a  very  extraordina  y  and  unexpected  reward  granted  to 
the  faith  of  Peter  and  announced  in  such  solemn  terms.  Others  claim 
that  by  "  this  rock  "  He  meant  His  oion  person;  but  why  then  did 
Our  Saviour  use  the  future  tense,  "  I  will  build  "  and  not  *  I  buld "? 
Is  it  not  evident,  moreover,  that  cedificabo  (I  will  build)  and  dabo  (I 
will  give)  are  intimately  united  by  the  sense  of  the  whole  context; 
that  if  one  of  these  two  verV»s  designate  Peter,  the  othe^  also  d'^es  ? 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.        375 

is  not  the  case  with  the  Syro-Chaldaic,  the  tongue  in  which 
Our  Saviour  spoke,  or  with  the  majority  of  the  Eastern 
versions,  or  even  with  the  Hebrew  text,  which  is  considered 
to  be  the  original  text  of  St.  Matthew;  it  is  absolutely  the 
same  word  (Cephas)  which  is  repeated:  "  Thou  art  rock,  and 
upon  this  rock."  As  to  the  Greek,  the  best  authors  use 
TteTpa  or  Tterpos  to  signify  a  stone,  a  rock. 

Moreover,  the  demonstrative  this,  upon  this  rock,  found  in 
all  texts,  leaves  no  room  for  doubt.  As  to  the  pronoun  it 
at  the  end  of  the  phrase,  whether  it  refers  to  rock  or  to  church 
does  not  alter  the  general  sense;  for  if,  according  to  the 
promise  of  Christ,  the  power  of  hell  is  never  to  prevail  against 
the  Church,  it  is  because  the  Church  is  built  upon  Peter, 
established  as  the  foundation  of  this  spiritual  edifice,  the 
basis  of  which  is  authority. 

Let  us  now  show  that  Our  Saviour  gave  Peter  the  fulness 
of  power.  In  fact  the  foundation  upon  which  a  perfect  society 
rests  can  be  only  the  supreme  authority  which  governs  it. 
Just  as  the  solidity  of  an  edifice  and  the  adherence  of  all  its 
parts,  nay,  its  very  existence,  depends  upon  its  foundation,  so 
the  stability,  the  unity,  the  very  existence  of  the  Church 
rests  upon  Peter.  The  Church,  therefore,  would  not  exist 
without  Peter;  where  he  is,  there  is  the  Church :  Ubi 
Petrus,  ihi  Ecclesia  (St.  Ambrose).  Buo  to  produce  the 
result  intended  by  Our  Saviour  this  authority  must  be  full 
and  entire;  it  must  include  the  triple  powers — legislative, 
judiciary,  and  coercive;  in  other  words,  Peter  must  be  in- 
vested with  the  primacy  not  only  of  honor,  but  of  power, 
of  jurisdiction.  His  authority  must  extend  over  the  entire 
Church,  over  the  apostles  as  well  as  over  the  faithful:  it  was 
not  a  portion  of  His  Church  which  Jesus  gave  him  to  govern, 
that  of  Rome,  for  example,  or  Antioch ;  it  was  His  Church, 
the  entire  religious  society  which  He  founded. 

The  words  which  follow  in  the  text  of  St.  Matthew,  and 
which  were  also  addressed  only  to  Peter,  bear  no  less  con- 
clusive testimony  in  favor  of  the  primacy  of  Peter:   ''And  I 


376  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

will  give  to  thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  And 
whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind  upon  earth,  it  shall  be  bound 
also  in  heaven :  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose  on  earth,  it 
shall  be  loosed  also  in  heaven.'^  ^ 

It  is  well  known  that  in  the  language  of  the  Scriptures, 
in  all  Eastern  languages,  and  in  others  as  well,  the 
keys  of  the  kingdom  incUcate  supreme  power,  sovereignty. 
Jesus  wished  that  this  power  should  be  exercised  over 
all  the  members  of  His  Church  without  exception,  over  all 
the  spiritual  rulers  as  well  as  over  the  simple  faithful;    for 

^  Apropos  of  this  text  Ruskin,  Sesame  and  Lilies,  p.  41,  quotes 
these  lines  from  Milton: 

"  Last  came,  and  last  did  go. 
The  pilot  of  the  Galilean  Lake; 
Two  massy  keys  he  bore  of  metals  twain 
(The  golden  opes,  the  iron  shuts  amain). 
He  shook  his  mitred  locks,  and  stern  bespake,"  etc., 

and  then  says:  "Let  us  think  over  this  passage  and  examine  its 
words.  First,  is  it  not  singular  to  find  Milton  assigning  to  St.  Peter 
not  only  his  full  episcopal  function,  but  the  very  types  of  it  which 
Protestants  usually  refuse  most  passionately?  His  'mitred'  locks! 
Milton  was  no  bishop-lover;  how  comes  St.  Peter  to  be  'mitred'? 
'Two  massy  keys  he  bore.'  Is  this,  then,  the  power  of  the  keys 
claimed  by  the  Bishops  of  Rome,  and  is  it  acknow^ledged  here  by 
Milton  only  in  a  poetical  license,  for  the  sake  of  its  picturesqueness, 
that  he  may  get  the  gleam  of  the  golden  keys  to  help  his  effect?  Do 
not  think  it.  Great  men  do  not  play  stage-tricks  with  doctrines  of 
life  and  death :  only  little  men  do  that.  Milton  means  what  he  says, 
and  means  it  with  his  might  too — is  going  to  put  the  whole  strength 
of  his  spirit  presently  into  the  saying  of  it.  For  though  not  a  lover 
of  false  bishops,  he  was  sl  lover  of  true  ones;  and  the  Lake-pilot  is 
here  in  his  thoughts,  the  type  and  head  of  true  episcopal  power.  For 
Milton  reads  that  text,  '  I  will  give  unto  thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom 
of  heaven,'  quite  honestly.  Puritan  though  he  be,  he  would  not 
blot  it  out  of  the  book  because  there  have  been  bad  bishops;  nay, 
in  order  to  understand  him,  we  must  understand  that  verse  first; 
it  will  not  do  to  eye  it  askance,  or  whisper  it  under  our  breath,  as  if 
it  were  the  weapon  of  an  adverse  sect.  It  is  a  solemn  universal  asser- 
tion, deeply  to  be  kept  in  mind  by  all  sects." — Translator. 


THE   CHITRCH  OF   ROME   THE   TRUE   CHURCH.  377 

the  kingdom  of  heaven  represents  here  undoubtedly,  as  in 
numerous  other  passages,  the  Church. 

Objection. — It  is  alleged  against  this  decisive  argument 
in  favor  of  the  primacy  of  Peter  that  this  power  to  bind  and 
to  loose  was  given  later  to  all  the  apostles  (Matth.  xviii.  18). 
Hence  it  would  seem  that  the  promise  made  only  to  Peter 
did  not  convey  any  greater  power  than  was  afterward 
accorded  to  all  the  apostles. 

Answer. — To  appreciate  the  falseness  of  this  conclusion 
it  is  sufficient  to  remark  that  Christ  in  addressing  only  Peter, 
and  in  this  very  solemn  manner,  promises  him  not  only  the 
power  to  bind  and  to  loose,  but  moreover,  and  first  of  all, 
to  make  him  the  foundation  of  His  Church  and  to  give  him 
the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  Evidently  this  promise, 
given  in  reward  of  his  personal  profession  of  faith  and  in 
such  emphatic  terms,  has  some  special  significance:  it  must 
contain  something  more  than  the  simple  promise  of  the  power 
to  bind  and  to  loose.  If,  therefore,  the  power  to  bind  and 
to  loose  signifies  the  fulness  of  power,  this  something  addi- 
tional must  be  the  primacy  of  the  same  power.  The  power 
to  loose  and  to  bind  was  given  to  all,  and  by  the  same  au- 
thority, but  not  in  the  same  manner.  Peter,  to  whom  alone 
the  power  was  first  given,  received  it  in  all  its  fulness  without 
any  restriction,  he  was  to  exercise  it  over  the  other  apostles; 
they  also  received  it,  but  only  after  Peter,  secondarily,  and 
not  over  him.  ''Upon  one  alone,''  says  St.  Cyprian,  the 
illustrious  bishop  of  Carthage,  ''did  Christ  build  His  Church, 
and  him  He  commanded  to  feed  His  sheep.  And  though 
after  His  Resurrection  He  gave  to  all  His  apostles  the  same 
power  to  remit  sin,  yet,  in  order  to  manifest  unity.  He  has 
by  His  own  authority  so  placed  the  source  of  the  same 
unity  as  to  begin  from  one.  .  .  .  The  primacy  was  given  to 
Peter  for  the  government  of  one  Church  and  one  apostolic 
chair.''  The  other  Fathers  hold  the  same  language  (see 
Third  Argument).  Bossuet,  therefore,  gives  us  only  the 
teaching  of  tradition  when  he  says  in  his  celebrated  Discours 


378  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

sur  V unite  de  Veglise:  "  It  was  manifestly  the  intention  of 
Jesus  Christ  to  place  first  in  one  alone  what  He  afterwards 
willed  to  place  in  many;  but  the  sequence  does  not  reverse 
the  beginning,  and  the  first  does  not  lose  his  place.  .  .  . 
The  promises  of  Christ  as  well  as  His  gifts  are  without  repent- 
ance, and  that  which  He  has  once  given  indefinitely  and  uni- 
versally is  irrevocable ;  moreover,  the  power  given  to  several 
is  necessarily  restricted  by  being  divided,  while  power  given 
to  one  alone,  and  over  all,  carries  plenitude."  If  the 
slightest  doubt  as  to  the  meaning  of  Jesus  could  remain  in 
our  minds.  He  Himself  dispels  it  when  He  fulfils  His  promise. 
h.  The  Fulfilment  of  the  Promise. — Our  Lord  after 
His  Resurrection  appeared  to  seven  of  His  disciples  on  the 
shore  of  the  Sea  of  Tiberias,  and  addressing  the  apostle  who 
had  denied  Him  thrice.  He  asked  him  three  times:  ''Simon 
son  of  John,  lovest  thou  Me?  (Lovest  thou  Me  more  than 
these?)  "  Peter  answered  with  a  triple  and  touching  protesta- 
tion of  love.  Jesus  addressed  him  these  solemn  and  decisive 
words:  ''Feed My  lambs,"  "  Feed  My  sheep"  (John  xxi.  16, 
17).  We  know  that  the  word  to  feed  means,  in  the  Greek  text, 
to  rule,  to  govern.  Behold,  then,  Peter,  and  Peter  alone, 
established  shepherd  of  the  flock  of  Christ  with  an  authority 
which  is  in  no  way  limited.  Moreover,  in  designating  the 
entire  Church  under  the  figure  of  a  flock,  Jesus  explicitly 
distinguishes  in  this  flock  the  lambs  from  the  sheep,  indicating 
by  the  first  the  simple  faithful,  and  by  the  second  those  by 
whom  they  are  spiritually  begotten  and  who  must  feed 
and  guide  them,  that  is,  the  bishops  and  priests.  And  in 
placing  Peter  over  all  the  fold,  Christ  Himself,  the  sovereign 
Pastor,  bestowed  upon  him  the  most  extended  power,  the 
plenitude  of  power,  the  primacy  of  jurisdiction.  "All," 
says  Bossuet,  "are  submitted  to  the  keys  given  to  Peter, 
kings  and  peoples,  shepherds  and  sheep.  It  is  Peter  who  is 
first  commanded  to  love  more  than  all  the  other  apostles, 
and  then  to  feed  and  govern  all,  the  lambs  and  the  sheep, 
the  little  ones  and  the  mothers,  the  shepherds  themselves: 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       379 

shepherds  in  regard  to  the  people,  sheep  in  regard  to  St. 
Peter."  Thus  did  Christ  fulfil  the  promise  of  conferring 
upon  Peter  the  supreme  authority  of  His  whole  Church, 
of  making  him  the  foimdation-stone  of  this  edifice. 

Second  Argument,  drawn  from  the  Facts  related  in 
Scripture. — Peter,  in  the  gospels  and  in  the  Acts,  is  repre- 
sented as  the  first  and  the  chief  of  the  apostles,  yet  there  is 
never  any  protest  on  the  part  of  the  others,  though  we  know 
that  they  were  jealous  and  sensitive  in  regard  to  precedence. 
Thus  St.  Matthew  in  enumerating  the  apostles  is  not  content 
with  naming  Peter  first,  though  he  was  not  the  first  in  the  order 
of  vocation,  but  he  expressly  states  that  he  is  the  first.  ''The 
names  of  the  twelve  apostles,''  says  he,  are  these:  "the  first, 
Simon  who  is  called  Peter."  After  the  Ascension  of  Our  Sav- 
iour it  is  Peter  who  presides  and  directs  the  assembly  where 
St.  Matthew  is  chosen;  again,  he  is  the  first  to  preach  the 
Gospel  to  the  Jews,  to  receive  the  order  to  baptize  Cornelius 
and  open  the  Church  to  the  Gentiles.  He  punishes  Ananias 
and  Sapphira  for  their  untruth,  and  confounds  Simon  the 
magician ;  it  is  he,  again,  who  proclaims  before  the  tribunal 
his  right  and  his  mission  to  preach,  who  works  the  first  miracle 
in  confirmation  of  the  new  religion;  he  is  the  first,  again,  to 
speak  in  the  Council  of  Jerusalem  when  "all  the  multitude 
held  their  peace.''  Cast  into  prison,  he  is  an  object  of  sohci- 
tude  to  the  entire  Church,  which  never  ceases  to  pray  for  him 
until  he  is  miraculously  dehvered;  it  is  he,  again,  who  founds 
in  Asia  the  see  of  Antioch,  which  became  for  this  reason 
the  patriarchal  see.  Finally,  it  was  he  who  founded  the 
see  of  Rome,  and  because  he  died  bishop  of  that  city,  his 
lawful  successors  have  always  had,  and  will  always  preserve, 
the  primacy  of  the  universal  Church. 

Hence  we  see  that  St.  Peter  is,  by  the  will  of  Christ  Him- 
self, the  sole  founder  of  the  Church,  made  or  appointed  the 
bearer  of  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  the  depositary 
of  the  sovereign  power,  the  supreme  pastor  of  the  entire 
flock;   and  that  it  is  with  reason  that  all  Cathohc  tradition, 


380  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

after  naming  Peter  the  prince  of  the  apostles,  proclaims  the 
pope  the  prince  of  bishops,  the  Father  and  Doctor  of  all 
Christians,  the  head  of  all  churches,  the  supreme  pastor  of 
the  universal  Church,  etc.^ 

Third  Argument,  drawn  from  Tradition. — The  Fathers 
of  the  Church  agree  in  interpreting  the  above  texts  in  the 
sense  of  a  veritable  primacy  of  jurisdiction  granted  to  St. 
Peter.  The  Hmits  of  our  work  do  not  permit  us  to  develop 
this  important  proof  at  any  length,  but  we  cannot  refrain 
from  giving  a  few  texts,  particularly  from  the  first  centuries, 
during  which  time,  according  to  Protestants  themselves,  the 
Church  of  Christ  preserved  the  doctrine  of  Christ  in  all  its 
purity.  The  texts  are  so  clear  and  exphcit  that  they  dispense 
with  all  commentary.  Let  us  hear  Tertullian  first:  ''Noth- 
ing could  have  been  hidden  from  Peter,  who  received  the 
keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  with  the  power  of  binding  and 
loosing  upon  earth  and  in  heaven,  and  who  was  called  Peter 
because  upon  him  as  upon  a  foundation-stone  the  Church 
was  built."  In  another  place  he  says:  ''Our  Saviour  gave 
the  keys  to  Peter,  and,  through  Peter,  to  the  Church. ' '  Origen 
declares  that  though  the  Church  is  founded  upon  all  the 
apostles,  Peter  nevertheless  is  "the  grand  foundation  of  the 
Church,  the  solid  rock  upon  which  Christ  built  it."  Peter 
has  received  "supreme  power  to  feed  the  sheep."  "Though 
Our  Lord  gave  all  the  apostles  the  power  to  bind  and  to  loose, 
nevertheless,  in  the  interest  of  unity,  He  spoke  only  to  Peter 
when  He  said,  'Thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I  will 
build  My  Church,  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail 
against  it.'"  This  is  also  the  opinion  of  St.  Pacian,  whose 
language  is  identical  with  that  of  St.  Optatus  of  Milevum: 
"In  the  interest  of  unity,  Peter  merited  the  place  at  the 
head  of  all  the  apostles,  and  he  was  the  only  one  to  receive 
the  power  of  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  in  order  to  communi- 

*Livius,  St.  Peter,  Bishop  of  Rome;  Waterworth,  The  Fathers  on 
St.  Peter;  also,  Faith  of  Catholics,  vol,  i. ;  Hunter,  tr.  V.,  ch.  2, 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       381 

cate  it  to  the  others."  ''Through  Peter,  Christ  confided  to 
the  bishops  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven." 

The  testimony  of  Eusebius  of  Cesarea,  St.  Hilary  of  Poi- 
tiers, St.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  St.  Ephrem,  St.  Epiphanius, 
St.  Basil,  St.  Ambrose,  St.  John  Chrysostom,  St.  Jerome, 
St.  Augustine,  St.  Eucharius,  Bishop  of  Lyons,  and  many 
other  Fathers  and  writers  of  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries, 
is  no  less  conclusive  in  favor  of  the  primacy  of  jurisdiction 
than  that  of  the  Fathers  immediately  following  the  time  of 
the  apostles.  But  we  shall  be  content  with  mentioning  the 
clear  text  of  St.  Teo  the  Great:  ''  Out  of  the  whole  world  Peter 
alone  is  chosen  to  preside  over  the  calUng  of  all  the  Gentiles, 
and  over  all  the  apostles,  and  the  collected  Fathers  of  the 
Church;  so  that  though  there  be  among  the  people  of  God 
many  priests  and  many  shepherds,  yet  Peter  rules  all  by  per- 
sonal commission,  whom  Christ  also  rules  by  sovereign  power. 
Beloved,  it  is  a  great  and  wonderful  participation  of  His  own 
power  which  the  divine  Condescendence  gave  to  this  man; 
and  if  He  willed  that  other  rulers  of  the  Church  should 
enjoy  aught  together  with  him,  yet  never  did  He  give,  save 
through  him,  what  He  denied  not  to  others." 

In  addition  to  the  authority  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Church, 
whose  unanimity  can  be  explained  only  by  the  faithful 
preservation  of  apostolic  tradition,  we  have  that  of  the 
General  Councils,  which  are  also  the  authentic  voice  of  the 
universal  Church  (see  below,  p.  387  ff.)- 

Second  Thesis. — Jesus  Christ  Desired  that  this  Primacy  should 
Descend  to  the  Lawful  Successors  of  Peter. 

This  thesis  has  already  been  proved  apropos  of  the  apos- 
tolicity  of  the  ministry.  Let  us  mention,  however,  a  few 
decisive  reasons  which  relate  especially  to  the  primacy. 

The  form  which  Jesus  Christ  gave  His  Church  can  be 
modified  only  by  Him.  Now  Christ  in  constituting  His 
Church    established  a  primacy  which  no  one    can  touch, 


382  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

much  less  suppress;  hence  it  must  always  exist  not  personally 
in  St.  Peter,  but  in  his  lawful  successors. 

Moreover,  the  text  of  St.  Matthew  presents  the  primacy 
of  St.  Peter  as  the  foundation  of  the  Church,  without  which 
it  cannot  exist.  It  is  in  fact  this  primacy  which  must  sus- 
tain in  the  Church  unity  of  government,  purity  of  doctrine, 
hohness  of  morals;  on  it,  in  a  word,  depend  the  stability  and 
the  efficacy  of  the  divine  work.  The  foundation  of  an  edifice, 
and  particularly  a  foundation  of  this  nature,  must  necessarily 
endure  as  long  as  the  edifice  itself,  that  is,  according  to  the 
divine  promises,  until  the  end  of  time.  Now  Jesus  knew  that 
Peter  would  not  live  forever ;  hence  He  evidently  desired  that 
his  ministry  and  his  primacy  should  be  perpetuated  until 
the  end  of  time  in  his  lawful  successors.^ 

Remark. — It  results  from  the  two  preceding  theses  that 
the  jurisdiction  or  power  of  the  Pope  is  ordinary,  and  not 
restricted  to  exceptional  cases.  Jesus  Christ  in  fact  made 
no  restrictions  when  He  established  Peter  the  founder  of  His 
Church  and  the  pastor  of  His  flock.  He  desired  that  this 
Church  should  always  find  its  stabihty  in  its  foundation, 
and  that  the  flock  should  never  cease  to  obey  its  pastor. 
No  doubt  the  popes,  in  the  interest  of  good  government, 
usually  exercise  their  jurisdiction  in  the  form  of  direction 
and  surveillance,  leaving  to  the  bishops  the  initiative,  and 
the  freedom  of  action  necessary  in  the  details  of  an  effectual 
administration;  but  they  do  not  for  this  reason  lose  the 
rights  conferred  upon  them  by  the  supreme  pastor  of  souls.  ^ 

^  The  perpetuity  of  St.  Peter's  primacy,  by  the  divine  ordinance  of 
Christ,  is  easily  proved  from  the  constant  tradition  of  the  Church, 
where  it  is  laid  down  as  the  very  foundation  upon  which  the  Fathers 
and  Councils  base  their  belief  in  the  Roman  Primacy. — Editor. 

Hergenroether,  Cath.  Church  and  Chr.  State,  I.,  essay  4;  Br.  W. 
xiii.  480. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       383 

Third  Thesis. — The  Church  of  Rome  Possesses  the  Primary  of 
the  See  of  Peter. 

This  is  a  point  concerning  which  no  dispute  seems  possible. 
It  is  very  evident  that  the  CathoHc  Church,  and  it  alone, 
obeys  the  successors  of  St.  Peter,  the  first  supreme  pastor 
given  to  the  Church  by  Christ  Himself.^ 

A.  Tradition  and  history  afford  us  such  abundant  and  clear 
testimony  in  regard  to  St.  Peter's  sojourn  in  Rome  that  for 
thirteen  centuries  no  one  thought  of  questioning  it.^  After 
the  Waldenses,  Protestants  would  naturally  try  to  deny  this 
fact,  which  was  of  extreme  importance  in  their  controversies 
with  Catholics.  Hence  they,  together  with  modern  un- 
believers, left  nothing  undone  to  destroy  this  truth,  solidly 
established  by  incontrovertible  documents,  and  made  still 
more  certain  by  the  labors  to  which  their  attacks  gave  rise. 
It  may  be  well  to  give  a  brief  summary  of  the  proofs  fur- 
nished us  by  the  most  authentic  records. 

1st.  The  prince  of  the  apostles  himself  may  serve  as  wit- 
ness here.  In  his  first  epistle  addressed  to  the  Christians  of 
Asia  Minor  he  concludes  thus :  ''  The  Church  that  is  in  Babylon 
saluteth  you,  so  doth  my  son  Mark"  (1  Peter  v.  13).  The 
word  Babylon  evidently  means  here,  as  well  as  in  various 
parts  of  the  Apocalypse,  the  city  of  Rome,  regarded  then 

^  "The  Primacy  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  that  is  of  the  Pope,  is  the 
complex  result  of  doctrine  and  fact.  It  supposes  the  truth  of  the 
perpetuity  of  the  Primacy,  and  the  twofold  historical  fact  that  Peter 
was  Bishop  of  Rome  and  that  he  made  the  Roman  Episcopate  the 
sole  title  of  succession.  The  question  whether  Peter  was  ever  in 
Rome,  though  not  necessarily  identical  with  the  fact  of  his  Roman 
Episcopate,  is  practically  bound  up  very  closely  therewith." — Schanz, 
III.,  ch.  13,  n.  6.  See  also  I.  E.  R.,  Oct.  1901;  Spalding,  Evidences, 
1.  12,  n.  3;  Livius,  1.  c,  pt.  iii, 

^Livius,  St.  Peter;  Fouard,  St.  Peter;  Thebaud  Church  and 
Gentile  World,  II.,  ch.  11;  Parsons,  Studies,  I.;  Chatard,  Occasional 
Essays,  n.  1;  Barnes,  St.  Peter  m  Rome;  Schanz,  III.,  p.  470  ff.; 
Murphy,  ch.  4;  Bishop  England's  Works,  II.,  p.  370)  C.  W.  ix.  374, 
xvi.  55,  345;  D.  R.,  April,  Oct.  1897. 


384  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

by  the  Jews  as  the  centre  of  impiety,  as  was  the  Babylon 
of  the  East  by  the  Jew:?  of  the  Captivity.  It  has  always  been 
interpreted  in  this  sense  by  the  Fathers  of  the  Church,  with 
whom  even  M.  Renan  fully  agrees,  as  well  as  the  Protestant 
Grotius.  Moreover,  the  arguments  used  by  unbeheving 
scholars  to  overthrow  this  ancient  tradition  and  prove  that 
the  Babylon  mentioned  in  the  epistle  of  St.  Peter  is  a  city 
of  the  East  will  not  bear  serious  examination. 

2d.  At  the  end  of  the  first  century,  St.  Clement  of  Rome, 
disciple  of  the  chief  of  the  apostles,  speaking  of  the  faithful 
sacrificed  by  Nero  after  the  burning  of  Rome,  mentions 
among  them  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul,  and  he  adds  these  signifi- 
cant words:  ''They  were  a  great  example  among  us;  it  was 
here  that  they  bore  the  outrages  of  men  and  endured  all 
kinds  of  tortures."  It  is  well  known  that  this  saint's  epistle 
is  the  first  Christian  writing,  outside  of  the  Scriptures,  which 
has  come  down  to  us. 

Forty  years  after  the  death  of  St.  Peter,  St.  Ignatius, 
dragged  from  Antioch  to  Rome,  where  he  became  the  prey 
of  the  beasts  of  the  amphitheater,  addressed  to  the  Romans 
this  touching  prayer:  ''I  conjure  you,  show  me  not  un- 
seasonable kindness,  let  me  become  food  for  the  beasts.  .  .  . 
I  do  not  command  you  like  Peter  and  Paul ;  they  were  apostles, 
and  I  am  only  a  condemned  man."  These  words  are  signifi- 
cant only  in  as  far  as  they  admit  that  the  two  apostles 
governed  the  Church  of  Rome. 

Though  the  early  ages  of  Christianity  afford  httle  explicit 
testimony  in  regard  to  Peter's  sojourn  at  Rome,  it  is  not  a 
matter  of  astonishment.  For,  in  addition  to  the  fact  that 
but  few  of  the  writings  of  that  period  have  come  down  to  us,  no 
one  thought  of  expressing  any  doubt  upon  this  subject,  nor, 
consequently,  of  attesting  it;  but  little  attention  is  given 
by  writers  to  idle  questions  during  times  of  persecution. 
Hence  St.  Peter's  sojourn  in  the  Eternal  City  is  mentioned 
only  incidentally  here  and  there. 

3d.  A  century  after  the  death  of  St.  Peter,  the  tradition 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       385 

of  his  sojourn  and  of  his  martyrdom  at  Rome  was  universal. 
Renan  himself  says:  ''No  one  denies  that  from  the  end 
of  the  second  century  the  general  belief  of  the  Christian 
Churches  was  that  the  apostle  Peter  was  martyred  at  Rome.'^ 
And  TertulHan,  who  lived  in  Rome  at  the  end  of  the  second 
century,  says:  ''Go  through  the  apostoUc  churches  and  you 
will  still  find  the  very  chairs  that  were  occupied  by  the 
apostles,  each  in  its  place.  If  you  are  near  Italy  you  have 
Rome.  0  happy  Church,  to  which  the  apostles  gave 
their  doctrine  and  their  blood;  where  Peter  endured  the 
same  suffering  as  his  Master!"  "If  you  go  to  the  Vatican, 
or  to  the  Ostian  Way,"  wrote  Caius  under  the  pontificate  of 
Zephyrinus  (202-219),  "you  will  find  the  trophies  (tombs) 
of  those  who  founded  this  Church."  He  says  elsewhere 
that  Eleutherius  was  "the  thirteenth  bishop  of  Rome  after 
St.  Peter." 

St.  Irenseus,  bishop  of  Lyons,  disciple  of  St.  Polycarp,  who 
was  taught  by  St.  John,  mentions  twice  in  his  treatise  against 
heresies  that  Peter  and  Paul  founded  the  Church  of  Rome. 
The  same  testimony  is  borne  by  St.  Denis  of  Corinth,  St. 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  Origen.  St.  Cyprian,  martyred  in  the 
year  258,  calls  the  Church  of  Rome  the  see  of  Peter.  It  is 
useless  to  quote  the  Fathers  of  later  times;  they  are  unani- 
mous in  their  testimony. 

4th.  The  most  ancient  catalogues,  in  enumerating  the 
series  of  Roman  pontiffs,  always  place  St.  Peter  at  the  head 
of  the  hst.  Such  are  those  of  St.  Irenseus,  Tertulhan,  and 
Optatus  of  Milevum.  Eusebius,  who  borrowed  his  hst  from 
the  memoirs  of  Hegesippus  (175  to  189),  writes  in  his  history: 
"After  Peter,  the  first  bishop  of  Rome  was  Linus,  and  Clement 
was  the  third."  ' 

5th.  The  same  testimony  is  borne  by  the  monuments, 
medals,  and  paintings  of  the  first  ages.  According  to 
de  Rossi,  it  is  the  veritable  episcopal  chair  of  St.  Peter, 

^  D.  R.,  Oct.  '98;  Apr.  '99,  on  the  Succession  of  the  first  Roman 
bishops;  Birkhauser,  p.  105;  Briick,  I.,  p.  77. 


386  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

the  chair  which  he  used  in  religious  ceremonies,  which  is 
venerated  as  a  sacred  rehc  at  Rome.  The  author  of  the 
poem  against  Marcion  speaks,  in  the  beginning  of  the  third 
century,  of  the  real  chair  in  which  Peter  sat,  and  in  which 
he  commanded  that  Linus  should  follow  him.  Tertulhan 
bears  similar  testimony  in  favor  of  the  episcopal  throne  of 
St.  Peter. 

6th.  There  is  no  contrary  tradition  that  can  be  cited 
against  this  constant  tradition  of  the  first  ages  of  the  Church. 
No  city  except  Antioch  boasts  of  ever  having  had  St.  Peter 
as  its  first  pastor;  no  one  ever  thought  of  locating  the  tomb 
of  the  prince  of  the  apostles  anywhere  but  at  Rome.  The 
Ebionitic  and  Gnostic  apocrypha  themselves,  though  they 
tell  us  a  thousand  fables  concerning  St.  Peter,  never  placed 
the  seat  of  his  episcopacy  anywhere  but  at  Rome;  finally, 
among  so  many  heretics  and  so  many  schismatics  of  all 
times,  no  one,  until  the  appearance  of  the  Waldenses,  or 
we  might  say  until  the  Reformers  of  the  sixteenth  century, 
questioned  the  general  behef  in  this  historical  fact.  Let 
us  add  that  among  Protestants  themselves  there  is  a  large 
number  of  scholars  who  admit  with  us  St.  Peter's  sojourn 
in  the  Eternal  City.  We  may  cite  among  others  Cave, 
Grotius,  Usserius,  Basnage,  ScaHger,  Neander;  even  Renan 
finally  says:  ^'I  think  the  tradition  in  regard  to  Peter's 
sojourn  at  Rome  probable,  but  I  believe  that  this  sojourn 
was  of  brief  duration,  and  that  Peter  suffered  mart3Tdom 
shortly  after  his  arrival  in  the  Eternal  City." 

Hence  it  is  incontestable  that  St.  Peter,  martyred  in  the 
year  67,  came  to  Rome  and  died  bishop  of  that  city.  We  may 
even  fix  the  period  of  the  apostle's  arrival,  in  the  year  42, 
on  the  authority  of  the  first  part  of  the  ''Catalogue  of  Libe- 
rius,"  of  the  historian  Paul  Orosius,  a  writer  of  the  fourth 
century,  of  the  historian  Eusebius,  whose  chronicles  were 
written  about  the  year  310,  and  of  St.  Jerome,  born  in  246. 
The  latter  says:  ''Simon  Peter  came  to  Rome  to  combat 
Simon  the  magician,  the  second  year  of  the  reign  of  Claudius, 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.        387 

and  he  occupied  the  episcopal  chair  there  during  twenty-five 
years,  until  the  last  year,  that  is,  until  the  fourteenth  of 
the  reign  of  Nero."  According  to  the  illustrious  archaeolo- 
gist J.  B.  de  Rossi  the  ancient  monuments  confirm  this  date 
completely. 

It  is  to  be  remarked,  moreover,  that  no  ancient  author, 
no  monument,  either  directly  or  indirectly,  contradicts  the 
twenty-five  years  of  the  episcopacy  of  St.  Peter,  and  the 
learned  P.  Ch.  De  Smedt,  Bollandist,  in  his  Dissertationes 
selectee  unhesitatingly  concludes  that  the  opinion  attributing 
to  St.  Peter  twenty-five  years  of  episcopacy  at  Rome  is  ''by 
far  the  most  probable."  We  must  not  conclude,  however, 
that  St.  Peter  remained  at  Rome  without  ever  leaving  it 
during  all  this  period.  The  contrary  is  very  probable.  In 
fact  there  is  clear  mention,  notably  in  Lactantius  and  in  the 
catalogue  of  Fehx  IV.,  of  a  second  voyage  of  St.  Peter  to 
Rome  imder  the  Emperor  Nero.^ 

The  series  of  St.  Peter's  successors  is  known  to  us  down 
to  Leo  XIII.  Hence  Rome,  and  consequently  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church,  possesses  the  See  of  St.  Peter. ^  No  sect, 
moreover,  has  ever  claimed  this  inheritance. 

B.  In  further  proof  of  our  thesis  we  shall  content  ourselves 
with  mentioning  the  first  four  Councils,  which  have  always 
been  regarded  by  the  Church  with  special  veneration,  and 
considered  as  almost  equal  to  the  four  gospels. 

The  Council  of  Nice,  held  in  325,  attests  in  formal  terms 

*  Fouard,  St.  Peter  and  the  First  Years  of  Christianity. 

' "  It  is,  making  allowance  for  the  greater  lapse  of  time  between 
the  two  extremes,  as  easy  to  prove  that  Pius  IX.  is  the  successor  of 
St.  Peter  in  the  government  of  the  Church,  as  that  James  K.  Polk 
is  the  successor  of  George  Washington  in  the  presidency  of  the  United 
States;  and  the  fact  of  the  succession  in  the  former  case  as  much 
proves  that  the  Church  of  which  Pius  IX.  is  Pope,  is  the  Church  of 
St.  Peter,  that  is,  of  the  apostles,  as  the  succession  in  the  latter  case 
proves  that  the  United  States  of  which  Mr.  Polk  is  President  is  the 
same  political  body  over  which  George  Washington  presided." — Br. 
W.  vi,  479, 


388  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

that  the  Roman  Church  has  always  possessed  the  primacy} 
This  was  so  evidently  the  primacy  of  jurisdiction  that  the 
Council  of  Sardica,  an  appendix  to  that  of  Nice,  acknowledged 
that  a  bishop  deposed  by  the  Council  of  the  province  had  a 
right  to  appeal  from  it  to  the  Pope.  The  second  General 
Council,  which  was  held  at  Constantinople  in  381,  also  places 
the  Bishop  of  Rome  before  the  Bishop  of  Constantinople,  the 
imperial  city.  In  431  the  bishops,  assembled  for  the  third 
time  in  Ecumenical  Council  at  Ephesus,  declared  that  they 
deposed  the  heresiarch  Nestorius  because  they  were  obliged 
so  to  do  by  the  holy  canons  and  by  the  letter  of  Pope  Celestin, 
Bishop  of  the  Church  of  Rome.  In  the  same  Council  one  of 
the  legates  of  the  Pope  makes  the  following  declaration, 
which  was  received  without  the  shghtest  protest:  "No  one 
is  ignorant  of  that  which  has  been  known  at  all  times,  namely, 
that  the  holy  and  blessed  Peter,  .  .  .  who  received  the  keys  of 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  with  the  power  to  bind  and  to  loose, 
has  continued  to  live  up  to  the  present  time  and  still  lives  in 
his  successors,  exercising  through  them  the  right  to  judge.'' 
Then  in  451  comes  that  of  Chalcedon,  the  testimony  of  which, 
too  long  to  quote,  is  still  more  exphcit.  Let  it  suffice  to 
say  this  is  the  Council  in  which,  when  the  letter  of  St.  Leo 
to  Flavian,  Bishop  of  Constantinople,  was  read,  all  the  mem- 
bers exclaimed:  "  This  is  the  true  faith  of  our  fathers,  the  faith 
of  the  apostles;  this  is  our  belief;  thus  do  all  the  orthodox 
believe.  Anathema  to  him  who  does  not  believe  the  same !  Peter 
has  spoken  to  us  thus  through  Leo.''  In  the  synodal  letter  to 
the  Pope  his  confirmation  of  the  acts  of  the  Council  is  re- 

^  This  is  strongly  contested  by  excellent  Catholic  historians,  who 
deny  that  the  famous  Canon  VI.  of  this  Council  deals  at  all  with 
the  Primacy.  See  Hefele,  History  of  the  Councils,  I.,  p.  397  ff.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  above  canon  does  not  prove  anything  against 
the  Roman  Primacy.  See  Parsons,  Studies,  I.,  p.  205  ff.  On  the 
above  Councils  and  the  canons  referred  to  see  Hefele,  I.e.  On  the 
Councils  of  Ephesus  and  Chalcedon  in  particular  see  Rivington,  The 
Roman  Primacy. — Editor. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.       389 

quired  in  order  that  "  thy  loftiness  may  accomplish  that 
which  is  meet  towards  thy  sons. " 

It  is  useless  to  speak  of  the  Councils  which  followed,  the 
doctrine  of  which  is  incontestable.  Let  us  mention  only  the 
Council  assembled  at  Florence  in  1439,  in  which  the  Greeks 
as  well  as  the  Latins  signed  the  following  decree  of  Pope 
Eugenius  IV.:  ''We  define  that  the  holy  apostolic  see  and 
the  Roman  Pontiff  possess  primacy  over  the  whole  world; 
that  this  same  Roman  Pontiff  is  the  successor  of  blessed 
Peter,  prince  of  the  apostles;  that  he  is  the  true  Vicar  of 
Christ,  and  the  head  of  the  entire  Church,  the  Father  and 
Doctor  of  all  Christians ;  that  to  him  was  given  by  Our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  in  blessed  Peter,  full  power  to  feed,  rule,  and 
govern  the  universal  Church,  as  is  also  declared  in  the  acts  of 
the  Ecumenical  Councils  and  in  the  holy  canons.  ^^ 

Let  us  hear,  finally,  the  words  of  the  Vatican  Council,  in 
chapter  iii.  of  the  Dogmatic  Constitution  on  the  Church. 
After  renewing  and  developing  the  definition  of  the  Council  at 
Florence  it  adds:  ''If  any  one  say  that  the  Roman  Pontiff  is 
charged  only  with  the  surveillance  or  direction  and  not 
with  plenary  and  supreme  power  of  jurisdiction  over  the 
entire  Church,  not  only  in  that  which  relates  to  faith  and 
morals,  but  also  in  matters  relating  to  the  discipline  and 
government  of  the  Church  throughout  the  world;  or,  again, 
that  he  possesses  only  the  chief  share  of  this  power,  and  not 
all  its  fulness ;  or,  finally,  that  this  power  which  he  possesses 
is  not  ordinary  and  immediate,  over  all  the  churches  as  well 
as  over  each  individually,  over  all  the  pastors  and  the  faith- 
ful and  over  each  one  of  them,  let  him  be  anathema!"  ^ 

^  See  the  numerous  testimonies  of  the  Fathers  collected  in  Faith 
of  Cath.,  I.,  p.  59  ff. ;  Allies,  The  Throne  of  the  Fisherman;  Waterworth, 
pt.  ii. 

To  prove  the  primacy  of  St.  Peter  and  that  of  his  successors, 
the  Roman  Pontiffs,  we  may  also  appeal  to  all  ecclesiastical  history. 
We  shall  see  that  from  the  beginning  of  the  Church,  and  throughout  all 
the  ages,  the  most  positive  facts  and  the  most  undeniable  testimony 
witness  to  the  faith  of  pastors  and  of  the  faithful  in  the  primacy  of 


390  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

The  logical  and  indisputable  result  of  our  thesis  is  that 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  is  the  true  Church,  since  she 
alone  possesses  the  centre  and  foundation  of  the  Church, 
and  she  alone  has  preserved  her  first  organization  in  all  its 
integrity. 

the  See  of  Rome.  But  we  do  not  think  it  necessary  to  dwell  upon 
these  historical  facts,  which  may,  moreover,  be  found  in  numerous 
works.  We  may  quote  particularly  the  69th  conference  of  P. 
Ollivier.  "We  should  never  finish,"  he  says  at  the  conclusion  of 
one  of  his  conferences,  "  if  we  were  to  quote  all  the  instances  in  which 
the  Churches  of  the  East  and  of  the  West  appeal  to  Rome,  either  to 
ask  support  of  the  Pope  in  their  struggle  with  error,  or  to  obtain 
from  him  the  re-establishment  of  their  episcopal  sees,  of  which  they 
had  been  unjustly  deprived,  or  to  consult  h^m  upon  doubtful  ques- 
tions relating  to  faith  or  discipline.  ...  A  fact  which  of  itself  demon- 
strates the  primacy  of  the  Pope  is  that  never  in  the  East  or  in  the 
West  was  a  single  Council,  even  among  the  most  important,  recognized 
as  ecumenical,  that  is,  as  representing  the  universal  Church,  unless  it 
was  convened,  at  least  implicitly,  by  the  Pope,  and  presided  over  or 
confirmed  by  him.  .  .  .  Since  the  concurrence  of  the  popes  was  con- 
sidered as  essential  by  the  entire  Church,  the  entire  Church,  by  this 
fact,  recognized  their  primacy  of  power  and  of  jurisdiction." — See 
Kenrick,  Primacy,  ch.  13;  Allies,  See  of  Peter,  ch.  5,  n.  5, 6. 


CHAPTER  III. 

CERTAIN  PREROGATIVES  CONFERRED   BY  JESUS  CHRIST 
UPON  HIS  CHURCH. 

The  Church,  in  order  to  carry  out  effectually  her  mission 
of  saving  souls  to  the  end  of  time,  must  needs  have  certain 
privileges  or  prerogatives  which  are  quite  indispensable 
to  accomphsh  her  purpose.  Among  these  the  principal  are 
indefectibility,  or  perpetual,  uninterrupted,  and  unchangeable 
existence  through  all  the  changes,  evolutions,  and  revolu- 
tions of  the  centuries;  authority,  that  is,  spiritual  rights  and 
powers  over  the  souls  of  men  as  well  as  over  the  means  of 
salvation;  infallibility,  which  is  the  divine  guaranty  of  the 
unfailing  exercise  of  the  Church's  authority;  sovereignty j 
or  absolute  freedom  and  independence  of  any  and  all  earthly 
power. 

In  the  next  four  articles  we  shall  prove  that  the  all-wise 
and  all-powerful  Founder  of  the  Church  did  endow  her  with 
these  supernatural  attributes.  Lastly,  we  shall  treat  of 
Liberalism,  the  great  heresy  of  the  nineteenth  century,  which 
denies  to  the  Catholic  Church  most  of  the  above-mentioned 
prerogatives. 


ART.   I.— INDEFECTIBILITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.» 

Taken  in  its  broadest  acceptation  the  indefectibility  of 
the  Church  is  the  duration  that  Jesus  Christ  promised  her 
until  the  end  of  the  world,  with  the  maintenance  of  her 
interior  constitution  and  her  exterior  form,  with  the  preser- 

^  Spalding,  J.  M.,  Evidences,  10;  Manahan,  Triumph,  etc.;  Br.  W. 
xiii.  384;  C.  W.  xlix.  761;  Hunter,  I.,  n.  166  ff. 

391 


392  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

vation  of  all  her  properties  and  her  prerogatives.  The  Church 
can,  of  course,  admit,  in  the  series  of  centuries,  disciplinary 
changes  required  for  the  good  of  souls,  but  she  will  never 
be  deprived  of  one  of  her  constituent  elements  (her  members, 
her  chiefs,  her  organization),  nor  of  any  of  her  essential 
properties  (unity,  sanctity,  cathohcity),  nor  of  her  divine 
prerogatives  (authority,  infalhbility). 

Let  us  observe  at  the  same  time  that  this  promise  of 
indefectibihty  is  made  to  the  universal  Church,  and  not  to 
each  of  her  parts,  or  to  particular  churches.  The  latter  may 
fall  away  or  disappear;  but  despite  these  shipwrecks  the 
true  Church  of  Christ  will  always  remain,  ever  the  same; 
these  defections,  moreover,  will  be  compensated  by  the  con- 
quest or  the  foundation  of  new  churches.  Protestants,  some- 
times openly,  sometimes  covertly,  reject  this  indefectibihty. 
No  doubt  the  invisible  Church,  many  of  them  say,  cannot 
fail,  but  it  is  quite  otherwise  with  the  visible  Church,  which 
may  disappear  from  the  world  for  a  greater  or  shorter  time; 
and  this  they  allege  is  what  has  taken  place.^ 

Thesis. — Jesus  Christ  Wished  His  Church  to  Endure  without 
any  Essential  Change  until  the  End  of  Time. 

First  Argument. — A  great  number  of  texts  in  the  Old 
Testament  clearly  defines  the  perpetuity  of  the  reign  of 
Christ.  Let  us  hmit  ourselves  to  quoting  a  verse  from 
Daniel,  ii.  44:  "But  in  the  days  of  those  kingdoms  the 
God  of  heaven  will  set  up  a  kingdom  that  shall  never 
be  destroyed,  and  His  kingdom  shall  not  be  delivered  up  to 
another  people,  and  it  shall  break  in  pieces  and  shall  consume 
all  these  kingdoms,  and  itself  shall  stand  forever. '^  The 
synagogue,  which  was  to  change  its  form  and  receive  an 
essential  perfection,  is  frequently  contrasted  with  the  king- 

^  The  modern  fiction,  defended  by  Lasaulx,  Dollinger  and  others, 
of  a  triple  successive  development  of  the  Church,  called  respectively 
the  Petrine,  the  Pauline,  and  the  Johannine  Churches,  is  clearly  con- 
demned by  the  Vatican  Schema  on  the  Church,  ch.  8  and  can.  8. — 
Editor. 


CERTAIN   PREROGATIVES   OF  THE    CHURCH.  393 

dom  of  the  Messias,  the  New  Covenant,  the  Christian  Church, 
which  was  to  exist  forever,  and  remain  always  the  same. 
This  is  an  argument  frequently  used  by  St.  Paul,  particularly 
in  his  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (viii.  6  ff.;  xii.  27,  28). 

Second  Argument. — The  New  Testament  is  no  less 
expHcit  (Matth.  xiii.  24,  coll.  30,  39;  1  Cor.  xv.  24  f.). 

a.  In  a  text  already  quoted,  which  has  become  classic  and 
dispenses  with  commentary,  Jesus,  with  His  supreme  au- 
thority, confirms  this  indef ectibility :  ''And  I  say  to  thee 
that  thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  My 
Church,  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it'^ 
(Matth.  xvi.  18). 

b.  Christ,  sole  mediator  between  God  and  man,  has  con- 
fided the  fruits  of  His  Redemption  and  the  means  of  salvation 
to  the  Church.  Now  there  will  always  be  souls  to  be  saved 
by  these  means;  hence  Christ,  in  sending  the  apostles  to 
teach  and  to  baptize,  promises  to  be  with  them  all  days, 
even  to  the  consummation  of  the  world  (Matth.  xxviii.  20). 
But  this  perpetual  indefectibility  of  the  apostoHc  ministry, 
on  which  everything  depends  in  the  Church,  evidently  entails 
that  of  the  Church  itself.    (Cfr.  1  Tim.  ii.  4.) 

Third  Argument,  drawn  from  Theological  Reasons. — 
If  the  Church  could  ever  fail,  she  would,  by  this  very  fact,  lose 
irrevocably  all  efficacious  authority.  In  fact  all  who  chose 
to  rebel  against  the  Church  could  justly  claim  that  she  had 
failed  in  her  mission,  that  she  had  become  corrupt,  that 
she  no  longer  merited  either  their  confidence  or  obedience. 
Was  it  not  on  this  ground  that  the  innovators  of  the  sixteenth 
century  sought  to  justify  their  rebellion? 

ART   II,— AUTHORITY  OR   POWERS   OF  THE   CHURCH.* 

We  have  seen  that,  by  the  will  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  Church  is 
a  real  society.    We  shall  now  prove  that  Christ  in  founding 

*  Spalding,  J.  L.,  lecture  4;  Lacordaire,  conf.  2  on  the  Church; 
Hunter,  I.,  tr.  4,  ch.  4;  Br.  W.  viii.  359,  574;  C.  W.  xlii.  158,  324. 


394  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

His  Church  conferred  upon  her  all  the  power  necessary  to 
continue  the  work  of  redemption  till  the  end  of  the  world. 
This  power  is  threefold,  representing  the  threefold  office  of 
Christ  as  teacher,  priest,  and  king :  first,  the  power  to  teach 
revealed  truths  and  to  impose  her  teaching  {Magisterium); 
second,  the  power  of  exercising  the  sacred  priesthood  and 
of  dispensing  the  divine  mysteries  (Ministerium) ;  third,  the 
power  of  government  and  administration  over  all  her  mem- 
bers (Imperium).  Although  we  have  already  proved  the 
existence  of  these  three  powers  in  the  Church,  it  will  not  be 
useless  to  put  here  briefly  whatever  refers  to  them. 

Speaking  of  the  apostoficity  of  the  Church,  we  mentioned 
(p.  329)  only  two  powers  given  to  the  chiefs  of  the  Church, 
that  of  order  and  that  of  jurisdiction.^  But  there  we  con- 
sidered these  powers  in  regard  to  the  sources  from  which 
they  flow  (ordination  and  institution),  while  here  we  shall 
view  them  in  regard  to  the  objects  to  which  they  relate. 

I.  The  Power  to  Teach. 

The  Church  has  received  from  her  divine  Founder  the 
power  to  teach,  or  doctrinal  authority,  that  is,  the  right  and 
duty  to  preach  the  moral  and  dogmatic  doctrine  of  Jesus 
Christ,  and  to  impose  this,  doctrine  upon  all  men.^  This 
truth  is  so  evident  that  we  shall  content  ourselves  with 
merely  mentioning  the  following  brief  arguments : 

First  Argument. — As  the  doctrine  of  Jesus  Christ  can 
be  made  known  only  by  teaching,  the  Church,  in  receiving 
the  mission  to  make  this  doctrine  known  everywhere,  must 
necessarily  have  received  also  the  power  to  teach  afl  men. 
(See  Rom.  x.  14  ff.) 

Second  Argument. — The  words  of  Jesus  Christ  on  this 

*  Magisterium,  being  the  authoritative  teaching  and  thus  impljang 
the  right  to  preach  and  to  demand  both  the  "  obedience  unto  faith " 
as  well  as  the  public  profession  of  that  faith,  is  quite  appropriately 
referred  to  the  power  of  jurisdiction. — Editor. 

^  Ward  Essays  on  the  Doctrinal  Authority  of  the  Church. 


CERTAIN   PREROGATIVES   OP   THE   CHURCH.  395 

subject  are  sufficiently  clear  and  well  known:  '^All  power 
is  given  to  Me  in  heaven  and  on  earth;  going  therefore, 
teach  ye  all  nations  "  (Matth.  xxviii.  18, 19).  "  He  that  hear- 
eth  you,  heareth  Me:  and  he  that  despiseth  you,  despiseth 
Me.  And  he  that  despiseth  Me,  despiseth  Him  that  sent 
Me."     (Luke  x.  16.) 

Third  Argument. — The  apostles,  strengthened  by  these 
words  of  their  Master,  devoted  themselves  immediately 
after  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  the  ministry  of  preach- 
ing. ''Going  forth,  they  preached  everywhere,"  says  St. 
Mark,  ''the  Lord  working  withal,  and  confirming  the  word 
with  signs  that  followed."  To  those  who  would  forbid 
them  the  exercise  of  this  teaching  they  answered  with  the 
celebrated  words  which  have  become  the  motto  of  every 
true  Christian  brought  face  to  face  with  tyrannical  power: 
"We  must  obey  God  rather  than  men."  Or  again:  "We 
cannot  but  speak"  (Mark  xvi.  20;   Acts  v.  29;  iv.  20). 

Remarks. — 1st.  The  Church's  manner  of  teaching  is  always 
twofold.  The  ordinary  teaching  is  that  which  is  adminis- 
tered daily  through  the  bishops  or  their  delegates  and  under 
their  surveillance,  by  the  aid  of  preaching,  or  catechising, 
or  theological  lectures,  etc.  The  extraordinary  teaching  is 
that  which  is  given  by  the  Pope,  or  the  Councils  when  they 
proclaim  a  dogma  or  condemn  an  error.  It  is  evident  that 
the  extraordinary  form  of  teaching  is  in  no  way  required 
to  make  a  doctrine  an  article  of  faith  to  Christians,  otherwise 
the  dogma  of  the  Eucharist,  for  example,  would  not  have 
been  of  faith  before  the  tenth  century,  and  in  our  own  day 
the  visibility  of  the  Church,  her  indefectibility,  etc.,  would  not 
be  articles  of  faith,  since  they  have  never  been  solemnly 
defined.  The  Church  cannot  err  in  her  constant  and  uni- 
versal teaching  any  more  than  in  her  definitions  of  dogma. 
The  promises  made  by  Christ  admit  of  no  exception.  Heresy 
may  consist,  therefore,  in  denying  wittingly  a  dogma  pro- 
claimed by  the  ordinary  and  uniform  teaching  of  the  entire 
Church. 


396  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

2d.  In  consequence  of  this  mission  and  this  power  the 
Church  is  obhged  to  maintain  the  purity  of  faith,  to  guard  the 
faithful  against  erroneous,  impious,  and  immoral  doctrines, 
to  forbid  the  reading  of  books  and  papers  that  might  corrupt 
faith  and  morals,  to  supervise  all  dogmatic  and  moral  teach- 
ing given  in  society  by  any  teachers  whether  private  or 
official,  that  is,  appointed  by  the  state.  No  one  will  dispute 
this  point  when  there  is  question  of  a  Christian  society.  But 
even  though  the  constitution  be  based  upon  liberty  of  wor- 
ship, the  state,  if  it  truly  respect  liberty,  cannot  refuse  the 
Church  this  surveillance,  which  is  an  integral  part  of  the  Cath- 
olic apostolate.  The  state  should,  moreover,  at  least  for  its 
Catholic  subjects,  allow  ecclesiastical  superiors  power  to  exer- 
cise an  efficacious  control  over  the  various  branches  of  human 
knowledge  usually  taught  by  lay  professors.  Otherwise 
the  liberty  awarded  the  Church  would  be  a  fallacy,  since 
official  pedagogues  could,  in  teaching  science,  for  example, 
astronomy,  or  history,  or  literature,  attack,  contradict,  or  neu- 
tralize the  lessons,  the  dogmas,  and  the  moral  teaching  of 
the  Church.  Finally,  with  still  greater  reason  may  the 
Church  claim  the  right  to  brand  and  condemn  the  anti- 
religious,  atheistical,  and  so-called  neutral  (unsectarian) 
teaching  organized  under  the  patronage  of  the  state.  In 
cases  of  this  kind  she  must  have  recourse  to  every  means 
in  her  power,  to  every  spiritual  arm  in  her  possession,  to 
preserve  her  children  from  the  baneful  influence  of  such 
teaching. 

These  reflections  suffice  to  make  us  understand  and,  at  the 
same  time,  to  justify  the  Church's  attitude  toward  govern- 
ments which  have  promulgated  similar  legislation.  It  ex- 
plains the  conduct  of  the  Belgian  Episcopacy,  who  in  1869, 
with  admirable  energy,  saved  their  country  from  the  corrup- 
tion of  irreligious  schools.^ 

*  It  explains  in  particular  the  wonderful  system  of  parochial  schools 
in  the  United  States  of  America,  established  and  maintained  by  the 


CERTAIN   PREROGATIVES   OF   THE    CHURCH.  397 

II.  Power  to  Confer  the  Sacraments. 

The  Church  has  received  the  power  of  regulating  all  that 
concerns  the  administration  of  the  sacraments,  the  celebra- 
tion of  the  holy  sacrifice,  of  deciding,  in  a  word,  all  that 
belongs  to  public  worship. 

First  Argument. — How  could  the  Church  fulfil  her  mis- 
sion of  saving  souls  if,  while  enlightening  minds  with  the  hght 
of  revelation,  she  did  not  at  the  same  time  impart  the  strength 
absolutely  indispensable  for  the  observance  of  the  precepts 
imposed  by  revelation?  Now  it  is  through  the  sacraments, 
through  the  sacrifice  of  the  Mass  particularly,  and  through 
the  exercises  of  her  worship,  that  the  faithful  obtain  the 
graces  necessary  for  the  maintenance  of  the  spiritual  fife. 

Second  Argument. — Our  Saviour's  will  in  this  respect  is 
very  clear.  Thus  we  see  that  when  He  gave  His  apostles 
the  command  and  the  power  to  teach  He  also  imposed  upon 
them  the  obhgation  to  baptize  all  men;  at  the  Last  Supper, 
after  distributing  His  body  and  blood  to  them,  He  bade 
them  do  the  same  in  remembrance  of  Him;  on  another 
occasion  He  gave  them  the  power  to  forgive  sms,  so  that 
they  alone  had  the  power  to  loose  and  to  bind. 

Third  Argument. — The  apostles  themselves  affirm  this 
power  implicitly  by  exercising  it,  and  exphcitly  by  their 
words.  In  fact  we  see  them  baptizing,  confirming,  ordain- 
ing, celebrating  Mass,  ministering  to  the  sick,  etc.,  and 
St.  Paul  writes:  ''  Let  a  man  so  account  of  us  as  of  the  minis- 
ters of  Christ  and  the  dispensers  of  the  mysteries  of  God" 
(1  Cor.  iv.  1). 

III.  Power  to  Govern.* 

The  right  of  self-government  given  to  the  Church  com- 
prises three  distinct  powers  similar  to  those  possessed  by 

strenuous  efforts  of  the  Catholic  priests  and  bishops  and  the  enor- 
mous but  voluntary  contributions  of  the  faithful. — Editor. 
^  Burnet,  Path,  etc.;  ch.  3. 


398  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

civil  society :  legislative  power,  or  the  right  to  make  laws  and 
rules  binding  upon  all  the  subjects  of  the  Church;  judiciary- 
power,  to  define  the  sense  and  reach  of  her  laws,  to  decide 
disputed  cases,  to  pronounce  judgment  upon  guilt,  etc. ;  and, 
finally,  executive  or  coercive  power,  that  is,  the  right  to 
procure,  by  the  necessary  means,  particularly  by  the  use 
of  penalties  either  spiritual  or  temporal,  the  observance  of 
the  laws  which  she  imposes  on  her  members.  The  present 
adversaries  of  the  Church  rarely  deny  her  the  first  two 
powers,  that  of  teaching  and  of  administering  the  sacra- 
ments; they  are,  in  fact,  of  little  importance  to  them.  But 
they  make  fierce  war  against  this  power  of  governing,  as 
to  do  away  with  it  would  create  great  disorder  in  the  economy 
of  the  Church,  and  she  would  no  longer  be  able  to  repress  the 
revolts  of  her  members  and  to  resist  the  violent  attacks 
or  silent  intrigues  of  her  enemies. 

They  allege  that  the  Church  has  no  right  to  make  laws, 
to  judge  crimes,  to  punish  the  guilty;  or  if  she  has  any 
right  in  these  matters,  it  is  not  an  inherent  right  of  her 
constitution,  but  a  right  which  she  receives  through  partici- 
pation or  communication  with  the  civil  power,  through  the 
courteous  concession  of  rulers,  or  perhaps  through  usurpation 
made  possible  by  the  neghgence  or  the  connivance  of  govern- 
ments. Let  us  prove,  therefore,  that  the  Church  has  really 
received  this  power  from  Christ. 

First  Argument. — A  society  cannot  really  exist  and 
attain  its  end  without  the  power  to  govern.  A  multitude 
of  wills  seeking  to  attain  the  same  end  necessarily  requires 
common  and  efficacious  guidance.  Hence,  when  it  pleased 
Our  Saviour  to  unite  in  a  perfect  society  all  who  believed 
in  Him,  He  could  not  but  endow  this  society  with  the  au- 
thority necessary  to  accompHsh  its  mission.  In  other  words. 
He  had  to  establish  heads  and  rulers  invested  with  a  triple 
power,  legislative,  judiciary,  and  coercive;  a  law  supposes 
the  right  to  judge  the  guilty  and  to  inflict  punishment. 

Second  Argument,  drawn  from  the  Words  of  Scrip- 


CERTAIN    PREROGATIVES    OF   THE    CHURCH.  399 

TURE   already  quoted   and  explained   in   speaking    of    the 
ministry  of  the  apostles  and  the  primacy  of  St.  Peter. 

Third  Argument,  dra\vn  from  the  Conduct  of  the 
Apostles  and  the  History  of  the  Church. — The  apostles 
from  the  beginning  exercised  all  these  powers,  making  laws, 
pronouncing  judgment,  hurhng  anathemas  at  the  guilty  and 
the  rebelhous  without  consulting  the  civil  power  or  even 
despite  its  opposition  (Acts  xv.  28;  1  Tim.  i.  20;  1  Cor.  xi. 
33,  34;  vii.  12,  13;  v.  3,  4,  5;  iv.  21;  xi.  2;  1  Thess.  iv.  2.) 
The  Church  in  the  centuries  which  followed  continued  to 
exercise  the  same  powers  in  virtue  of  the  authority  properly 
belonging  to  her;  nor  has  belief  in  the  legislative  authority 
of  lawful  heads  ever  varied  in  the  Church.^ 

ART.   III.— INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE   CHURCH.^ 

1.  Its  Nature  and  Necessity. 

Nature. — To  be  infallible,  generally  speaking,  is  to  possess 
the  privilege  of  never  deceiving  or  being  deceived ;  this  privi- 
lege in  regard  to  the  Church  means  that  she  can  neither 
alter  the  doctrine  of  Jesus  Christ,  nor  misunderstand  the 
true  meaning  of  what  our  divine  Saviour  taught,  com- 
manded, or  prohibited.  No  doubt  God  only  is  infallible 
hy  nature;  but  He  may  by  a  special  providence  protect 
those  from  error  whom  He  has  charged  to  teach  in  His 
name,  so  that  their  teaching  will  never  deviate  in  any- 
thing from  the  truth.  Now  God  has  granted  this  infalli- 
bility to  His  Church;  and  we  shall  even  prove  that  He  had 
needs  grant  her  this  privilege.  In  speaking  thus  we  evidently 
have  in  view  the  ordinary  course  of  things,  for  God  could 
have  employed  another  means,  as  He  did  in  the  Old  Law,  by 
sending  prophets. 

*  Lacordaire,  conf.  6  on  the  Church  (her  coercive  power). 

^  See  references  p.  310;  also  Lyons;  Knox;  R^'vington,  Authority; 
Br.  W.  V.  280,  389,  vi.  324,  429  ff.,  453  ff.;  and  generally  works  writ- 
ten by  converts  in  defence  of  their  return. 


400  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

First  Thesis. — The  Authority  Divinely  Established  to  Teach  Men 
the  Doctrine  of  Jesus  Christ  must  he  Infallible  in  its  Teaching. 

First  Argument,  drawn  from  the  Mission  of  the 
Church  and  the  Necessity  of  Divine  Faith. — This  may 
be  stated  in  various  ways. 

a.  All  men,  to  be  saved,  are  obliged  to  believe  the  doctrine 
taught  by  Jesus  Christ.  Now  Christ  has  given  His  Church 
the  mission  and  power  to  teach  His  doctrine  and  transmit 
it  from  age  to  age  pure  and  intact;  therefore,  unless  Christ 
intervenes  with  continual  miracles  to  insure  the  purity  of 
this  teaching.  He  must  necessarily  guard  the  teaching  Church 
from  all  error;  in  other  words,  endow  her  with  doctrinal 
infallibility. 

b.  The  Church,  in  the  name  of  God,  rigorously  commands 
us  to  believe,  with  a  faith  resting  upon  divine  authority  and 
excluding  all  doubt,  whatever  she  offers  for  our  belief,  even 
mysteries  most  impenetrable  to  reason.  Now  the  Church 
has  no  right  to  require  of  men  divine  faith  in  her  teachings 
if  she  is  not  infallible.  No  one,  in  fact,  can  force  reason  to 
admit  without  reserve  a  proposition  which  is  not  certain. 
What  is  only  probable  evidently  cannot  command  complete 
and  absolute  faith;  hence  as  long  as  error  is  possible  doubt 
is  reasonable.  Without  the  infallibility  of  the  Church  divine 
faith,  firm,  unwavering  faith,  is  therefore  impossible;  and 
without  it  the  Christian  religion  itself  must  disappear. 

c.  Let  us  state  this  argument  in  more  general  terms. 
When  there  is  question  of  religious  truth  necessary  to  salva- 
tion, human  reason  imperiously  claims  absolutely  certain 
teaching.  Not  only  do  the  unlettered  feel  the  need  of  such 
teaching,  but  scholars  as  well,  despite  their  profound  re- 
searches and  sincere  efforts  in  search  of  truth.  Now  if 
there  were  no  infallible  teachers  of  religion,  mankind  would 
find  itself  abandoned  to  all  the  chances  of  error;  it  would 
fluctuate  in  uncertainty  in  regard  to  all  that  is  most  essential 
to  its  peace  and  happiness. 


CERTAIN    PREROGATIVES    OF    THE    CHURCH.  401 

d.  The  same  conclusion  follows  if  we  apply  this  reasoning  to 
the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  among  infidel  nations.  Without 
infallibility  the  propagation  of  the  Gospel  would  have  been 
impossible,  and  consequently  Catholicity  would  not  have 
been  a  property  or  distinctive  mark  of  the  true  Church.  The 
Church  sends  missionaries  everywhere  with  the  mission  to 
convert  nations  to  the  true  faith.  Now  if  such  missionaries 
do  not  teach  in  the  name  of  an  infalhble  authority,  these 
nations  would  have  a  right  to  say  that  their  doctrine  had 
probably  been  altered  in  its  passage  through  the  ages.  How 
could  they  reasonably  be  required  to  accept  with  full  and 
entire  faith  that  which  might  prove  to  be  only  error?  What 
difference  would  there  be  between  such  preaching  and  that 
of  Protestant  ministers  who  cannot  command  behef  in  their 
doctrine  in  the  name  of  God?  ^ 

Second  Argument,  drawn  from  the  Necessity  of 
Unity  of  Doctrine  or  Belief. — Controversy  concerning 
questions  of  faith  and  morals  will  necessarily  arise  in  the 
Church.  The  history  of  heresy  shows  us  that  such  con- 
troversies have  sprung  up  at  every  period.  How  could  they 
be  settled  if  there  were  no  infalhble  authority  to  pronounce 
upon  them?  Without  this  inf alhbility  the  Church's  decision 
could  not  end  the  controversy,  and  unity  of  doctrine  or 
behef  would  be  impossible. 

Second  Thesis. — Jesus  Christ  Established  in  His  Church  an 
Authority  Infallible  in  its  Dogmatic  and  Moral  Teaching, 

When  Jesus  Christ  sent  His  apostles  into  the  whole  world 
to  call  immortal  souls  to  the  truth  and  to  salvation,  He  said 
to  them:  "All  power  is  given  to  Me  in  heaven  and  in  earth; 
going  therefore,  teach  ye  all  nations:  baptizing  them  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost; 
teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever  I  have  com- 
manded you:  and  behold,  I  am  with  you  all  days,  even  to 

*  Lacordaire,  conf .  3  on  the  Church, 


402  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

the  consummation  of  the  world  "  (Matth.  xxviii.  18  ff.)-  ''  As 
the  Father  hath  sent  Me,  I  also  send  you"  (John  xx.  21). 
"Go  ye  into  the  whole  world  and  preach  the  gospel  to  every 
creature.  He  that  beheveth  and  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved; 
but  he  that  belie veth  not  shall  be  condemned. "  (Mark  xvi. 
15  f.)  ''And  I  will  ask  the  Father,  and  He  shall  give  you 
another  Paraclete,  that  He  may  abide  with  you  forever,  the 
Spirit  of  truth :  ...  He  shall  abide  with  you,  and  shall  be  in 
you"  (John  xiv.  16  f.).  ''But  when  He,  the  Spirit  of 
truth,  is  come,  He  will  teach  you  all  truth"  (John  xvi.  13). 
"  But  when  the  Paraclete  cometh  whom  I  will  send  you 
from  the  Father,  the  Spirit  of  truth,  who  proceedeth  from 
the  Father,  He  shall  give  testimony  of  Me:  and  you  shall 
give  testimony,  because  you  are  with  Me  from  the  begin- 
ning "  (John  XV.  26  f.).  ''  You  are  the  salt  of  the  earth;  .  .  . 
you  are  the  light  of  the  world"  (Matth.  v.  13,  14).  "He 
that  heareth  you,  heareth  Me;  and  he  that  despiseth  you, 
despiseth  Me  "  (Luke  x.  16).  "  If  he  will  not  hear  the  Church, 
let  him  be  to  thee  as  the  heathen  and  publican.  Amen,  I 
say  to  you,  whatsoever  you  shall  bind  upon  earth,  shall  be 
bound  also  in  heaven :  and  whatsoever  you  shall  loose  upon 
earth,  shall  be  loosed  also  in  heaven. "     (Matth.  xviii.  17  f.) 

Evidently  Jesus  Christ  has  estabhshed  a  perfect  solidarity 
between  Himself  and  those  whom  He  charged  to  teach  the 
world  the  truths  of  salvation.  In  the  most  solemn  manner 
He  promises  them  His  special  assistance  in  the  office  of 
teaching  imposed  upon  them,  and  He  tells  them  that  this 
assistance  shall  last  to  the  end  of  time,  assuring  it  thus  in  equal 
manner  to  their  legitimate  successors.  For  the  preaching  of 
religion,  absolutely  proof  against  all  error,  is  as  necessary  for 
the  coming  generations  as  it  has  been  for  those  of  the  past. 

It  seems  unnecessary  to  appeal  to  tradition.  Protestants, 
our  adversaries  in  the  present  question,  are  forced  to  ac- 
knowledge that  from  the  fifth  to  the  sixteenth  century  the 
Fathers  and  theologians  have  constantly  professed  the  Cath- 
olic dogma  of  infallibility.     From  which  fact  we  may  con- 


CERTAIN    PREROGATIVES   OF   THE    CHURCH.  403 

elude  that  it  was  also  the  doctrine  of  the  first  four  centuries; 
for  so  important  a  change  could  never  have  taken  place 
without  exciting  formidable  opposition  from  the  bishops 
and  the  faithful,  and  particularly  from  heretics.^  Moreover, 
what  has  always  been  the  tradition  of  the  Church  on  this 
subject  is  clearly  seen  from  the  whole  history  of  the  Church, 
especially  from  the  great  veneration  in  which  the  decisions  of 
the  Ecumenical  Councils  have  always  been  held,  a  veneration 
that  extends  to  the  very  text  of  the  first  four  General  Councils. 

II.  Object  of  Infallibility. 

The  doctrinal  authority  of  the  Church  is  not  unlimited; 
it  is,  on  the  contrary,  clearly  limited  to  the  domain  of  divine 
revelation.  It  relates  only  to  the  deposit  of  revealed  doc- 
trine and  that  which  is  necessary  for  the  preservation  of  this 
deposit.     These  same  boundaries  hmit  infallibihty. 

Its  object  includes,  then : 

1st.  The  teaching  of  dogma,  or  the  truths  of  faith  which 
are  to  be  beheved. 

2d.  Moral  teaching,  or  truths  to  be  practised. 

3d.  Matters  relating  to  general  discipline,  in  as  far  as  they 
pertain  to  faith  and  morals. 

4th.  Dogmatic  facts,  that  is  to  say,  facts  so  intimately 
connected  with  dogma,  that  they  cannot  be  questioned 
without  weakening  the  dogma  itself.  Such,  for  example, 
are  the  declarations  and  verifications  of  errors  contained 
in  the  writings  judged  by  the  Church,  since  otherwise  she 
could  not,  as  she  is  bound  to  do,  preserve  from  the  poison  of 
error  the  flock  confided  to  her  care. 

Remarks. — 1st.  Infallibihty  comes  neither  from  inspira- 
tion properly  speaking  (p.  54)  nor  from  a  new  revelation, 
but  from  a  special,  divine  assistance  granted  either  to  the 

*  Such  opposition  and  controversy  would  be  undoubtedly  recorded 
on  the  pages  of  the  history  of  those  times.  Yet  that  history  is 
absolutely  silent. — Editor. 


404  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

bishops  united  with  the  Pope,  or  to  the  supreme  pastor,  to 
enable  them  to  understand  and  proclaim  the  revelation 
made  by  Jesus  Christ.^  This  assistance  by  no  means  dis- 
penses with  useful  researches  and  discussions;  in  a  word, 
with  the  labor  of  man.  Only  after  taking  every  indispensable 
means  to  avoid  acting  precipitately,  only  after  studying 
with  extreme  care  the  two  sources  of  revelation.  Scripture 
and  tradition,  does  the  Church  or  the  Pope  declare  as  re- 
vealed a  belief  hitherto  imphcitly  contained  in  the  deposit 
of  revelation. 

2d.  Infallibility  differs  essentially  from  impeccabihty,  which 
consists  in  the  inability  to  sin ;  this  signal  privilege,  which  was 
awarded  to  the  Mother  of  God,  has  never  been  attributed 
to  the  sovereign  Pontiff. 

III.    Subject  of  Infallibility. 

A.  Infallibility  of  the  Teaching  Church. — To  say 
that  the  teaching  Church  is  infaUible  is  to  say  that  her 
body  of  pastors,  united  with  the  Pope,  the  supreme  head 
of  the  Church,  is  infallible,  whether  assembled  in  solemn 
session  of  an  Ecumenical  Council  or  dispersed  throughout  the 
world. 

To  be  ecumenical  or  general,  a  Council  must  be  convened 
or  approved  as  such  by  the  Pope,  to  whom  belongs  the  right 
to  preside  over  it  either  personally  or  by  his  delegates. 
Though  convened  by  the  Pope  or  with  his  approbation,  if 
the  head  of  the  Church  separate  from  it,  the  Council  becomes 
a  headless  assembly  and  can  do  nothing ;  if  it  persists  in  its 
work,  it  is  then  only  a  conventicle  or  meeting  of  dissenters. 

B.  Infallibility  of  the  Pope.^ — When  he  speaks  as 
head  of   the  Church    with    the    fulness   of    his    doctrinal 

'  Br.  W.  vi.  465  f. 

^  See  references  p.  373;  also  Knox;  Fessler;  Botalla;  Manning,  Petri 
Privilegium;  Story  of  the  Vatican  Council;  M.  Ixviii.  338;  Br.  W. 
xiii.  412,  and,  in  general,  works  on  the  Vatican  Council. 


CERTAIN    PREROGATIVES    OF   THE   CHURCH.  405 

authority  the  sovereign  Pontiff  possesses  in  himself  alone 
the  same  infalhbihty  as  the  whole  teaching  Church  or  the 
entire  episcopal  body.  Such  is  the  certain  behef  of  the 
Church  at  all  times,  and  which  has  become  an  article  of 
Catholic  faith  since  the  definition  of  the  Vatican  Council. 
Here  are  the  terms  of  this  definition: 

''We  teach  and  define  that  it  is  a  divinely  revealed 
dogma :  that  the  Roman  Pontiff,  when  he  speaks  ex  cathedra 
— that  is,  when  in  the  discharge  of  his  office  as  pastor  and 
teacher  of  all  Christians,  by  virtue  of  his  supreme  apostolic 
authority,  he  defines  a  doctrine  concerning  faith  or  morals 
to  be  held  by  the  universal  Church — is,  by  the  divine  assist- 
ance promised  to  him  in  blessed  Peter,  possessed  of  that 
infallibihty  with  which  the  Divine  Redeemer  willed  that 
His  Church  should  be  endowed  for  defining  a  doctrine  re- 
garding faith  or  morals ;  and  that  therefore  such  definitions 
are  irreformable  of  themselves  and  not  from  the  consent  of 
the  Church. 

*'If  any  one  should  have  the  rashness  to  contradict  our 
definition,  which  God  forbid,  let  him  be  anathema.'' 


Thesis. — When  He  Speaks  as  Head  of  the  Church,  with  Plenary 
Doctrinal  Authority,   the  Sovereign  Pontiff  is  Invested  with 

Infallibility. 

First  Argument,  draw^n  from  the  Holy  Scripture. — 
a.  ''I  say  to  thee  that  thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock 
I  will  build  My  Church,  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  pre- 
vail against  it  "  (Matth.  xvi.  18).  It  results  from  these  words 
that  the  Pope,  one  of  whose  essential  functions  is  to  teach 
the  truths  revealed  by  Jesus  Christ,  is  necessarily  infallible. 
On  him,  in  fact,  does  the  Church  rest  as  upon  her  visible 
foundation;  from  him  does  she  derive  her  stability.  Now 
the  stability  of  a  religious  society  depends  above  all  things 
on  unity  of  faith.     How  could  this  constant  and  perpetual 


406  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

unity  be  possible  if  Peter,  the  foundation  of  the  spiritual 
edifice,  could  be  mistaken  in  the  truths  which  he  requires 
the  faithful  to  believe?  If  the  Pope  by  his  teaching  could 
lead  the  faithful  into  error,  the  Evil  One,  the  father  of  lies 
and  of  error,  would  prevail  against  the  Church  and  against 
its  head. 

6.  ''Simon,  Simon,  behold  Satan  hath  desired  to  have  you 
that  he  may  sift  you  as  wheat:  but  I  have  prayed  for  thee 
that  thy  faith  shall  not  fail,  and  thou  being  once  con- 
verted, confirm  thy  brethren  "  (Luke  xxii.  31,  32).  Through 
this  prayer,  offered  for  Peter,  the  future  head  of  the 
Church  and  its  perpetual  foundation,  and  consequently  for 
his  successors,  Jesus  Christ  promises  that  their  faith  shall 
remain  invulnerable,  and  that  through  them  the  other 
members  of  the  Church  shall  be  preserved  firm  in  the  faith, 
despite  the  trials  to  which  they  may  be  subjected.  Now 
this  is  not  possible  except  on  condition  that  the  Pope  be 
infaUible  in  matters  of  faith.  In  fact,  if  Peter  and  his  suc- 
cessors are  not  infallible,  it  must  be  said  either  that  the 
prayer  of  Jesus  Christ  was  not  heard,  which  would  be  blas- 
phemous, or  that  Christ,  in  charging  Peter  to  confirm  his 
brethren  in  the  faith,  did  not  give  him  the  means  of  fulfilhng 
this  essential  office,  which  would  be  equally  insulting  to  the 
divine  Wisdom. 

c.  ''Feed  My  lambs,  feed  My  sheep''  (John  xxi.  15). 
These  words,  addressed  to  Peter  alone,  confer  upon  him  the 
mission  of  feeding  the  lambs  and  the  sheep,  that  is,  the 
faithful  and  those  who  are  their  spiritual  fathers,  hence  all 
the  members  of  the  Church  in  general.  Now  the  food  of 
souls  is  truth;  if  Peter  is  not  infallible,  if  he  cannot  discern 
with  certainty  between  the  true  and  the  false  in  matters  of 
faith,  he  would  corrupt  with  the  poison  of  error  the  flock 
confided  to  him,  he  would  lead  them  to  perdition. 

Let  us  remark  that  if  the  decisions  of  the  Pope  could  be 
reformed,  as  the  Galileans  desired,  it  would  be  the  flock  who 
would  lead  and  feed  the  pastor,  who  would  confirm  their 


CERTAIN   PREROGATIVES   OF   THE    CHURCH.  407 

guide  in,  the  faith,  which  is  diametrically  contrary  to  the 
will  of  the  divine  Master. 

Second  Argument,  drawn  from  Tradition. — If  Scripture 
is  clear  on  the  present  question,  tradition  is  no  less  exphcit. 
A  great  number  of  texts  from  the  holy  Fathers  and  from 
the  Councils  may  be  found  in  the  books  referred  to  above, 
p.  373,  especially  in  Manning,  Privil.  Petri,  pt.  ii.,  Botalla, 
and  Alnatt,  Cathedra  Petri. 

Let  us  note  only  this  fact,  decisive  in  itself,  that  at  all 
times  the  sovereign  Pontiffs  have  used  their  prerogative  in 
condemning  heresies  throughout  the  world  by  the  authority 
proper  to  them,  and  without  convoking  General  Councils,  and 
that  their  decisions  have  been  received  as  infallible  by  the 
entire  Church.  It  is  well  known  that  the  significant  and  oft- 
repeated  "Roma  locuta,  causa  finita" — Rome  has  spoken, 
the  cause  is  decided — dates  from  St.  Augustine.  Before 
him  St.  Ambrose  uttered  these  words,  which  have  passed 
into  an  axiom:  ''Where  Peter  is,  there  is  the  Church'' — Uhi 
Petrus,  ibi  Ecclesia. 

Remark. — This  definition  put  a  stop  to  the  errors  of 
Gallicanism.  Let  us  say  a  word  of  the  circumstances  which 
gave  rise  to  that  system.  Louis  XIV.  having  quarrelled 
with  Rome,  and  desiring  to  humble  Pope  Innocent  XI., 
convoked  an  assembly  of  prelates  and  deputies  of  the 
French  clergy,  in  which  Bossuet  drew  up  the  famous 
"Declaration  of  the  Galilean  Clergy,"  together  with  the 
four  Galilean  Articles,  the  last  of  which  was  as  follows: 
"Though  the  Pope  has  the  principal  part  in  questions  of 
faith,  and  his  decrees  relate  to  all  churches,  and  to  each 
one  in  particular,  his  judgment  is  not  irreformable,  unless 
by  the  consent  (express  or  tacit)  of  the  Church."  This 
article  had  never  any  doctrinal  value.  In  fact  only  thirty- 
four  of  the  one  hundred  and  thirty-five  prelates  signed  the 
declaration.  The  others  either  refused  their  assent  or 
resisted  it  with  vigorous  and  irresistible  logic.  That  same 
year,  1682,  it  was  solemnly  disapproved  by  Pope  Innocent 


408  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

XI.,  who  abolished  and  annulled  all  the  acts  of  that  assembly. 
In  1690  it  was  again  and  more  expressly  condemned  by 
Alexander  VIII.,  and  in  1794  by  Pius  VI.  Moreover,  the 
bishops  who  signed  the  declaration  disavowed  it,  and  Bossuet 
ceased  to  defend  it.  Louis  XIV.  submitted  in  his  turn  by 
suspending  the  execution  of  the  new  ecclesiastical  laws. 
This,  however,  did  not  stifle  Galilean  error;  it  rose  again  with 
a  certain  violence  at  the  time  of  the  Vatican  Council,  in  which, 
however,  it  received  its  death-blow.^  After  the  definition 
all,  anti-infaHibihsts  and  inopportunists,  with  a  few  rare 
exceptions,  accepted  the  decree  with  complete  submission, 
giving  to  the  world  again,  as  often  before,  a  grand  sight  of 
the  wonderful  strength  and  indestructible  unity  of  the 
Cathohc  Church. 

If  it  be  asked  how  GalHcanism  could  avail  against  a  truth 
so  solidly  founded  and  imiversally  admitted,  we  answer, 
political  motives  may  bhnd  the  finest  minds;  moreover,  the 
Galileans  unconsciously  adopted  a  false  and  absolutely 
impossible  hypothesis.^  They  supposed  the  Pope  speaking 
on  his  side,  and  the  entire  Church  holding  a  contrary  opinion ; 
and  they  could  not  understand  that  the  decision  of  the 
Pope  alone  should  prevail  against  the  opinion  of  all.  But 
this  was  an  untenable  supposition,  for  the  definition  of  the 
supreme  head  of  the  Church  can  be  only  the  expression  of 
the  unbroken  belief  of  the  Church.  We  know,  for  example, 
that  when  there  was  question  of  defining  the  dogma  of  the 
Immaculate   Conception,  the   universal   Church,    consulted 

^  On  GalHcanism  see  Hergenrother  Catholic  Church  and  Christian 
State;  Anti-Janus;  Manning,  Petri  Privilegium,  pt.  i.,  p.  40  ff.;  pt.  ii., 
p.  107  ff.;  Chatard,  Essay  1;  Botalla,  Supremacy,  p.  159;  Infallibility, 
p.  342;  Parsons,  IV.,  ch.  10;  Br.  W.  x.  471,  xi.  62,  252,  xiii.  462; 
D.  R,  New  Ser.  xiii.,  xxii. 

^  The  same  impossible  hypothesis  dictated  the  famous  decrees  of  the 
Synod  of  Constance  (1416-1418),  placing  the  general  council  (repre- 
senting the  whole  Church)  above  the  Pope,  as  if  the  mystic  body 
of  Christ,  the  Church,  could  be  whole  while  separated,  divided,  or 
standing  apart  from  its  divinely  appointed  head,  the  Pope. — Editor. 


CERTAIN   PREROGATIVES   OF  THE   CHURCH.  409 

in  reference  to  its  belief  on  this  subject,  answered  by  the 
voice  of  all  its  pastors  that  it  beheved  the  Mother  of  God 
to  be  immaculate.  One  bishop  alone  dissented,  but  as 
soon  as  the  dogma  was  proclaimed  he  hastened  to  proclaim 
his  acceptance  of  it. 

IV.  Conditions  of  Infallibility. 

We  have  seen,  in  speaking  on  the  subject  of  infallibility, 
what  is  required  to  make  a  Council  ecumenical  and  conse- 
quently infallible.  It  now  remains  for  us  to  say  under  what 
circumstances  the  Pope  is  infalhble,  that  is,  when  we  can  be 
certain  that  his  teaching  is  free  from  error.  To  know  this 
we  have  only  to  examine  the  terms  of  the  decision  of  the 
CouncH  of  1870. 

According  to  the  Council  the  Pope,  to  speak  ex  cathedra, 
must  first  act  in  virtue  of  his  supreme  authority  and  as  head 
of  the  Church.  Second,  he  must  have  the  intention  of  defin- 
ing a  doctrine,  an  intention  which  must  be  evident  either 
from  the  terms  he  employs  (for  example,  if  he  uses  the  words 
we  define,  if  he  pronounces  anathema  against  contrary  doc- 
trine) or  from  the  circumstances  under  which  he  speaks. 

In  a  word,  the  Pope  speaks  ex  cathedra  when  he  makes 
known  his  intention  to  oblige  the  faithful  to  believe  interiorly 
and  to  profess  exteriorly  that  which  he  teaches  concerning 
faith  and  morals. 

Hence  it  follows  that  this  character  of  infalUbihty  extends 
in  no  way  to  the  writings  and  acts  of  the  Pope  as  a  private 
man.  Such  are,  at  least  generally  speaking,  the  sovereign 
Pontiff's  allocutions  and  addresses  to  the  deputations  which 
he  receives,  as  well  as  briefs  which  he  addresses  to  indi- 
viduals; though  always  worthy  of  profound  respect,  these 
documents  do  not  constitute  a  definition. 

Let  us  remark  further  that  infalhbility  embraces  only  the 
definition,  and  not  the  considerations,  or  the  biblical,  philo- 
sophical, and  historical  arguments  which  usually  precede 
doctrinal  definitions. 


410  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 


ART.   IV.— RELATIONS   BETWEEN    CHURCH   AND  STATE.i 

The  Church  has  received  from  Jesus  Christ  all  the  powers 
necessary  to  attain  her  end,  and  all  men  who  desire  to  be 
saved  must  obey  her  laws.  On  the  other  hand,  man,  a 
social  being,  naturally  forms  part  of  a  civil  society,  which 
has  also  received  from  God  the  powers  necessary  to  attain 
its  proper  end,  and  justly  requires  obedience  to  its  laws. 
It  is  important  to  know  what  relations  God  wills  should 
exist  between  these  two  societies  composed  of  the  same 
members;  in  other  words,  to  know  the  reciprocal  rights  and 
duties  of  the  Church  and  the  State. 

Leo  XIII.  in  his  admirable  encychcal  on  Christian  States 
presents  these  relations  very  clearly.  Let  us  quote  a  few 
passages  from  it,  and  then  sum  up  this  doctrine  in  a  few 
theses,  which  will  help  to  fix  in  our  minds  the  ideas  relative  to 
this  important  question.  It  is  particularly  necessary  to  do 
so  at  the  present  day,  when  efforts  are  made  to  hamper 
the  Church  in  the  exercise  of  her  authority  and  make  her 
subordinate  to  temporal  powers. 

''God  has  divided  the  government  of  mankind  between 
two  powers,  ecclesiastical  and  civil ;  one  presides  over  divine 
things,  the  other  over  human.  Each  in  -its  sphere  is  sov- 
ereign; each  is  marked  with  Hmits  perfectly  defined,  and 
traced  in  conformity  with  its  nature  and  its  special  end. 
Hence  there  is,  as  it  were,  a  circumscribed  sphere,  in  which 
each  exercises  its  action  jure  proprio.  At  the  same  time, 
their  authority  being  exercised  on  the  same  subjects,  it  may 

^Allies,  Church  and  State;  Earnshaw,  Molitor,  Sweeney,  O'Reilly; 
Manning,  Newman,  and  others  against  Gladstone;  Manning,  Miscell., 
vol.  ii.,  n.  4,  5,  6;  Vat.  Deer.,  ch.  2,  3;  Hergenrother,  Church  and 
State,  vol.  i.,  Essay  1;  vol.  ii..  Essays  13,  14,  15;  Manning,  Essays, 
in  I.  and  II.  Ser.  (Lucas);  A  C.  Q.  ii.  430,  xvi.  20;  C.  W.  xxvii. 
lll,liv.389;  M.  xliv.  457;  D.  R.  New  Ser.  xxiv.  170,  454,  xxvi.  351, 
xxix.  308,  XXX.  174;  Br.  W.  vii.  554,  x.,  xi.,  xiii.  often;  Lacordaire, 
conf.  5  on  the  Church;  The  Yorke-Wendke  Controversy,  p.  ii. 


CERTAIN   PREROGATIVES   OF  THE   CHURCH.  411 

happen  that  one  and  the  same  thing,  though  for  different 
reasons,  may  come  mider  the  jurisdiction  and  judgment  of 
both  powers;  .  .  .  hence  the  necessity  of  having  between 
the  two  powers  a  system  of  well-ordered  relations,  analogous 
to  that  which  in  man  constitutes  the  union  of  soul  and 
body.  We  can  form  a  just  idea  of  the  nature  and  power  of 
these  relations  only  by  considering  the  nature  of  each  of 
these  two  powers  and  by  bearing  in  mind  the  excellence  and 
nobihty  of  their  ends,  since  the  special  and  immediate  end  of 
one  is  the  promotion  of  temporal  interests,  and  of  the  other, 
spiritual  and  eternal  interests.  Thus  all  that  is  sacred  in 
human  things  in  any  respect  whatever,  all  that  relates  to 
the  salvation  of  souls  and  the  worship  of  God,  either  through 
its  nature  or  through  the  relation  of  its  end,  comes  under 
the  authority  of  the  Church.  As  to  other  things  which 
relate  to  the  civil  and  political  order,  it  is  just  that  they 
be  subject  to  civil  authority,  for  Christ  has  commanded  us 
to  'render  to  Caesar  the  things  that  are  Caesar's,  and  to  God 
the  thmgs  that  are  God's.'  " 

Leo  XIII.  in  his  encychcal  on  Civil  Government  has  also 
said:  The  Church  '^ recognizes  and  declares  that  all  be- 
longing to  the  civil  order  are  under  their  {i.e.  temporal  rulers) 
power  and  supreme  authority.  In  things  the  judgment  of 
which,  for  various  reasons,  belongs  to  the  rehgious  and  to 
the  civil  power,  she  wishes  that  there  be  mutual  accord,  by 
which  blessed  means  both  powers  will  be  preserved  from  fatal 
dissensions." 

First  Thesis. — The  Ecclesiastical  Power  and  the  Civil  Power, 

Church  and  State,  are  Independent  or  Sovereign,  each  Within 

the  Limits  of  its  Proper  Sphere  of  Action. 

I.  Independence  of  the  Spiritual  Power. 

First  Argument. — ^This  is  clearly  evident  from  the 
divine  will.  To  Peter  and  his  successors  Christ  confided 
the  government  of  His  Church.    "To  her,  and  not  to  the 


412  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

State/'  says  Leo  XIII.  in  the  encyclical  on  Christian  States, 
"  belongs  the  right  to  guide  men  in  heavenly  things.  To  her 
has  God  given  the  command  to  make  known  and  to  decide 
all  things  relating  to  religion,  to  teach  all  nations,  to 
extend  as  far  as  possible  the  frontiers  of  Christianity,  in  a 
word,  to  administer  freely,  and  according  to  her  own  judg- 
ment, Christian  interests.''  It  is  evident  that  to  subject 
the  Church  to  a  power  other  than  that  which  God  has  es- 
tabhshed  would  be  to  overthrow  the  personal  work  of  God. 

Second  Argument,  from  the  Superior  End  of  the 
Church. — The  direct  end  of  civil  society  is  to  promote  the 
welfare  and  safety  of  man  here  below,  to  further  the  pres- 
ervation and  development  of  his  nature  in  the  physical 
and  intellectual  order.  The  special  end  of  rehgious  society 
or  of  the  Church  is  to  help  him  to  attain  perfect  and  eternal 
happiness,  to  establish  and  extend  the  reign  of  God  upon 
earth,  to  labor  for  the  moral  and  supernatural  perfection  of 
man,  to  lead  him  to  his  supreme  destiny,  to  insure  him 
boundless  happiness,  which  consists  in  the  eternal  possession 
of  God.  This  evidently  is  a  mission  superior  to  that  which 
is  proper  to  the  civil  power.  ''As  the  end  of  the  Church 
is  by  far  the  noblest  of  all,"  says  Leo  XIIL,  ''her  power 
should  rank  above  all  others,  and  cannot  in  any  way  be 
inferior  or  subject  to  any  civil  power." 

Third  Argument,  drawn  from  the  Nature,  the  Ob- 
jects, AND  THE  Extent  of  the  Church's  Authority. — 
a.  A  power  directly  divine,  universal,  perpetual,  and  immu- 
table in  its  origin  is  infinitely  superior  to  that  which  is  only 
indirectly  divine,  which  is  variable,  and  Hmited  by  time 
and  space.  Now  spiritual  power  was  established  directly  and 
immediately  hy  God  Himself ;  moreover,  it  is  universal  and 
perpetual,  and  is  founded  upon  divine  and  immutable  laws. 
The  authority  of  civil  rulers,  it  is  true,  also  comes  from  God: 
^' There  is  no  power  but  from  God"  (Rom.  xiii.  1).  But  in 
religious  society,  everything  depends  directly  upon  Him;  not 
only  spiritual  authority  itself,  but  also  its  form,  its  limits, 


CERTAIN    PREROGATIVES    OF   THE    CHURCH.  413 

and  the  manner  of  exercising  it,  rest  upon  a  positive  divine 
right;  the  community  possesses  and  transmits  no  power. 
In  civil  society,  on  the  contrary,  the  form  of  government 
and  the  conditions  of  sovereignty  are  of  positive  human 
right;  they  depend  on  the  free  choice  of  men,  and  con- 
sequently are  subject  to  change,  h.  The  objects  and  means 
of  this  spiritual  power  are  all  of  a  sacred  and  supernatural 
character :  the  word  of  God,  sacrifice,  sacraments  and  worship, 
Christian  virtue  and  sanctification.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  civil  power  is  confined  exclusively  to  objects  and  means 
of  the  natural  order,  c.  Finally,  in  regard  to  the  extent 
of  their  jurisdiction,  the  Church  is  essentially  universal 
and  perpetual;  it  must  carry  its  mission  to  all  nations,  to  the 
end  of  time.  The  civil  power,  on  the  contrary,  is  essentially 
national,  circumscribed  by  geographical  limits,  natural  or 
conventional,  and  has,  moreover,  only  a  limited  and  un- 
certain duration. 

Fourth  Argument,  from  the  Conduct  of  Christ  and 
His  Apostles. — Nowhere  do  we  find  Jesus  asking  permission 
of  earthly  rulers  to  preach,  to  assemble  His  apostles,  to  estab- 
lish His  Church.  Nor  do  we  find  that  He  commanded  His 
apostles  to  take  counsel  with  civil  governments  in  order 
to  propagate  the  Gospel  and  exercise  their  ministry.  He 
predicted,  on  the  contrary,  that  they  would  be  cruelly  treated 
and  persecuted  by  earthly  rulers  and  magistrates  because  of 
their  mission.  If  He  commanded  them  to  render  to  Caesar 
the  things  that  are  Caesar's,  that  is,  to  submit  to  him  in 
matters  purely  temporal,  if  He  Himself  gave  an  example 
of  this  submission  by  paying  the  tribute,  they  have  not  to 
consult  civil  authorities  in  matters  belonging  to  spiritual 
government.  Thus  we  find  the  apostles  announcing  the 
good  tidings  everywhere,  founding  churches,  consecrating 
bishops,  ordaining  priests  and  deacons,  making  disciplinary 
laws  and  precepts,  regardless  of  the  temporal  powers;  when 
driven  from  one  place  they  go  to  another;  if  they  are  over- 
whelmed with  outrages  and  insults,  they  glory  to  suffer  for 


414  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

the  name  of  Jesus.  They  cannot,  they  say,  be  silent  con- 
cerning that  which  they  have  seen  and  heard,  and  they  must 
''obey  God  rather  than  men.'' 

The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  offer  us  a  remarkable  example 
of  this  independence  of  the  spiritual  power.  The  Jewish 
magistrates  forbade  the  apostles  to  teach  the  doctrine  of 
Jesus,  alleging  that  they  disturbed  the  public  peace.  What 
do  the  apostles  reply?  ''We  must  obey  God  rather  than 
men."  Here  we  have  on  the  one  hand  the  Church  command- 
ing the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  in  order  to  fulfil  its  end, 
the  salvation  of  souls,  a  thing  of  spiritual  interest;  on  the 
other,  the  magistrates  forbidding  this  same  preaching,  in 
view  of  the  public  peace,  a  matter  of  temporal  interest. 
Now  the  Holy  Spirit,  by  the  mouth  of  Peter,  commanded 
them  to  disregard  this  prohibition.  The  apostle  does  not 
say  that  public  order  shall  not  be  disturbed;  he  only  alleges 
the  will  of  God  (iv.  19;  v.  29). 

Fifth  Argument,  from  Ecclesiastical  History. — The 
example  of  the  apostles  has  been  faithfully  imitated  by 
their  successors,  not  only  through  long  periods  of  persecu- 
tion, but  throughout  all  history.  "This  authority,  perfect 
in  itself  and  absolutely  independent,  the  Church  has  never 
ceased  to  claim  or  to  exercise  pubhcly.  .  .  .  Moreover,  it  has, 
in  principle  and  in  fact,  been  acknowledged  by  princes  and 
heads  of  government,  who  in  their  negotiations  and  trans- 
actions, by  sending  and  receiving  ambassadors,  and  by  the 
exchange  of  other  good  offices,  have  constantly  acted  with  the 
Church  as  with  a  sovereign  and  legitimate  power.  Thus  it 
was  by  a  special  providence  of  God  that  this  authority  was 
furnished  with  a  civil  principality  as  the  best  safeguard  of  its 
independence. "     (Leo  XIII.  on  Christian  States.) 

Remark. — There  is  nothing  in  common  between  the 
superiority  of  the  Church's  jurisdiction,  of  which  we  have  just 
spoken,  and  theocracy,  with  which  writers  sometimes  affect 
to  confound  it.  Theocracy,  which  is  the  government  of  a 
temforal  society  by  a  political  law  divinely  revealed,  and  by 


CERTAIN    PREROGATIVES    OF   THE    CHURCH.  415 

an  authority  supernaturally  constituted,  has  never  existed 
except  among  the  Jewish  people,  and  only  during  a  period 
of  their  history.  It  is  true  that  by  theocracy  is  sometimes 
meant  the  domination  which  many  attribute  to  the  clergy 
in  purely  temporal  matters.  But  the  Catholic  doctrine,  in 
proclaiming,  as  we  shall  see,  the  independence  of  civil  power 
in  these  matters,  renders  such  domination  impossible. 

II.  Independence  of  the  Civil  Power. 

As  long  as  it  does  not  violate  the  laws  of  God  and  the 
rights  of  the  Church,  as  long  as  the  spiritual  interests  and 
the  supreme  end  of  man  are  not  endangered,  the  State  is 
free  to  take  whatever  measures  it  pleases  in  regard  to  cus- 
toms, imposts,  finances,  armies,  public  works,  etc.  The 
Church  has  nothing  to  do  with  these  purely  human  details, 
relating  only  to  the  temporal  happiness  of  nations.  In 
other  words,  the  Church  has  not  and  does  not  claim,  in 
virtue  of  its  institution,  any  power  over  civil  society  in 
purely  temporal  matters  relating  to  a  temporal  end  or  an 
exclusively  temporal  interest.  ''The  civil  order,"  says  the 
present  Pope,  speaking  of  temporal  rulers,  ''is  entirely  subject 
to   their   power  and  to   their   sovereign   authority."^ 

Corollaries. — 1st.  It  follows  from  the  preceding  thesis 
that  there  exists  between  Church  and  State  a  real  dis- 
tinction  decreed  by  Jesus  Christ.  Let  us  observe,  however, 
that  this  distinction  is  not  rigidly  essential.  In  fact  God  could 
have  confided  to  the  same  authority  the  office  of  promoting  at 
the  same  time  the  spiritual  and  the  temporal  end  of  man. 
He  could  have  made  the  kings  of  the  earth  the  ministers 
of  the  head  of  the  Church,  receiving  their  power  from  him 
and  governing  in  his  name.  But  He  has  not  willed  to  do  this. 
Christ  in  reahty  has  ordained  that  each  of  these  two  ends 

*  See  Rickaby,  Essay  I.;  Moral  Philosophy  ch.  8;  BalmesJ  Civiliza- 
tion, ch.  49  ff. 


416  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

should  be  promoted  by  a  special  authority,   each,  in  its 
proper  sphere  of  action,  independent  of  the  other. 

2d.  From  what  we  have  stated  of  the  powers  conferred 
by  Christ  upon  His  Church,  and  the  independence  in  regard 
to  civil  authority  which  He  has  guaranteed  to  her,  it  results, 
in  virtue  of  the  definition  itself  previously  given,  that  the 
Church  is  truly  a  perfect  society.  It  also  follows  that  pagan 
Csesarism  and  all  encroachments  of  the  civil  power  upon  the 
religious  related  in  the  history  of  the  Church  must  be 
condemned. 

III.  Rights  of  the  Church. 

It  will  not  be  beside  our  purpose  to  enumerate  here  a  few 
of  the  rights  which  the  Church  justly  claims.  To  rob  her 
of  these  rights  is  to  violate  the  independence  which  belongs 
to  her  as  a  perfect  society,  possessing  in  herself,  according 
to  the  sovereign  order  of  Jesus  Christ,  her  Founder,  all  the 
means  necessary  to  attain  her  end. 

A.  The  Church  has  the  right  to  fulfil  the  mission  and 
exercise  the  power  she  has  received  from  her  divine  Founder 
without  having  to  ask  the  authority  of  the  civil  power, 
and  without  being  subject  to  its  control  or  its  interference. 
Thus  she  is  absolutely  independent  in  everything  relating 
to  the  teaching  of  dogma  and  of  morals,  the  administration 
of  the  sacraments,  the  election  of  her  pontiffs,  the  erection 
and  direction  of  her  seminaries  and  rehgious  commimities, 
the  distribution  of  ecclesiastical  offices.  No  one  has  the 
right  to  prevent  the  sovereign  Pontiff  from  communicating 
with  the  clergy  and  the  faithful,  or  to  prevent  the  promulga- 
tion of  his  briefs  or  the  execution  of  his  decrees;  the  royal 
placet  and  exequatur  with  which  civil  authority  sometimes 
claims  to  control  the  acts  of  the  spiritual  power  are  ilhcit 
and  of  no  value  unless  they  are  the  result  of  a  concordat,^ 
that  is,  of  a  concession  of  ecclesiastical  authority. 

*  Hunter,  vol.  i.,  n.  303;  Hergenrother,  Church  and  State,  I.,  p.  71. 


CERTAIN   PREROGATIVES   OF  THE   CHURCH.  417 

B.  As  each  member  of  the  Church  is  composed  of  a  double 
nature,  of  a  soul  and  of  a  body,  he  must  be  led  to  his  final 
end  by  means  appropriate  to  this  double  nature.     Hence: 

a.  The  Church  has  a  right  to  impose  upon  its  members 
not  only  purely  spiritual  but  also  material  things,  such  as 
fasting,  almsgiving,  assistance  at  divine  worship. 

6.  The  Church  has  the  right  and  the  duty  to  carry  on 
divine  worship  exteriorly  and  publicly,  and  consequently  to 
prescribe  pubhc,  exterior  ceremonies,  such  as  processions, 
pilgrimages;  to  require  the  material  means  necessary  for 
the  exercise  of  her  worship,  for  the  support  of  her  ministers, 
for  the  construction  and  preservation  of  sacred  edifices,  and, 
since  material  means  are  necessary  for  this  purpose,  to 
acquire  temporal  goods,  to  hold  and  possess  them. 

c.  The  Church  has  the  right  to  command  the  obedience 
of  her  members,  to  impose  upon  the  rebelHous  spiritual  or 
material  penalties,  either  for  their  amendment  or  as  an 
example  to  others. 

None  of  these  rights  can  be  taken  from  the  Church  without 
violating  the  independence  which  she  justly  claims  as  a 
perfect  society,  that  is,  as  a  society  possessing  in  itself,  by 
the  sovereign  will  of  Christ,  her  Founder,  all  the  means  of 
preservation  and  of  action  necessary  to  attain  her  end. 


Second  Thesis. — In  Cases  of  Conflict,  that  is,  when  in  Mixed 
Matters  the  Two  Authorities  Prescribe  Contradictory  Obliga- 
tions for  Members  Owing  Allegiance  to  Both  Powers,  the  Au- 
thority of  the  Church  must  Prevail  over  that  of  Civil  Society. 

In  temporal  matters  there  arises,  sometimes  in  the  ordinary 
course  of  things,  sometimes  through  exceptional  circum- 
stances, a  spiritual  interest  which  the  Church  must  safe- 
guard; at  the  same  time  the  purpose  or  object  of  such  interests 
may  not  be  of  a  sufficiently  supernatural  character  to  place 
them  altogether  in  the   spiritual  or  supernatural  sphere; 


418  CHRISTIAN    APOLOGETICS. 

hence  these  are  called  mixed  matters;  a  case  in  point  is 
the  question  of  the  temporal  possessions  of  the  Church. 

''All/'  says  Leo  XIII.,  ''which  in  human  things  is  sacred 
for  any  reason  whatever,  all  that  pertains  to  the  salvation 
of  souls  and  the  worship  of  God,  either  in  its  nature  or  its 
end,  comes  under  the  authority  of  the  Church."  This  is 
the  proper  domain  of  the  Church,  and  consequently  she  has 
a  right  to  exercise  her  authority  in  regard  to  governments  as 
well  as  in  regard  to  the  individual  faithful.  Nevertheless 
history  attests  that  in  questions  of  this  nature  the  Church 
always  tries  to  act  in  concert  with  the  State,  in  order  that 
such  matters  may  be  regulated  by  a  common  agreement, 
rather  than  by  a  summary  and  supreme  decision  on  her  part. 
Let  us  add  further  the  following  words  of  the  encyclical 
already  quoted:  "At  times  it  may  happen  that  another 
means  of  securing  harmony  and  guaranteeing  peace  and 
liberty  avails;  this  is  when  the  heads  of  governments  and 
the  sovereign  pontiffs  have  a  special  agreement  upon  some 
special  point.  Under  such  circumstances  the  Church  gives 
striking  proof  of  her  motherly  charity  in  carrying  indulgence 
and  condescension  as  far  as  possible." 

The  thesis  announced  is  only  a  logical  deduction  of  what 
has  gone  before;  nevertheless,  because  of  its  importance  at 
the  present  time,  it  is  well  to  insist  a  little  further  on  some 
of  the  arguments  upon  which  it  rests. 

First  Argument,  drawn  from  the  End  itself  of  the 
Church. — ^This  end  is  infinitely  superior  to  that  of  the  State. 
What,  in  fact,  are  temporal  goods  compared  to  eternal? 
What,  says  Our  Saviour,  will  it  profit  a  man  to  gain  the 
whole  world  if  he  lose  his  own  soul?  All  earthly  possessions, 
and  civil  society  itself,  are  only  means  given  by  God  to  man  to 
lead  him  to  his  final  end,  the  possession  of  eternal  happiness. 
The  proper  and  immediate  end  of  the  State  is  to  promote 
the  temporal  happiness  of  man;  therefore  in  everything 
relating  to  the  final  end  of  man  it  must  be  subordinate  to 
the  Church.    "The   art  of  the  pilot,"   says   St.    Thomas, 


CERTAIN   PREROGATIVES    OF    THE    CHURCH.  419 

''regulates  that  of  the  sailor,  the  art  of  the  architect  that  of 
the  mason,  and  the  arts  of  peace  those  of  war." 

Second  Argument,  drawn  from  the  Superiority  of  the 
Church's  Authority  over  any  Civil  Power. — See  Third 
Argument,  p.  412. 

Third  Argument,  drawn  from  Catholic  Tradition  and 
Pontifical  Decisions. — ''AH  the  Fathers  of  the  Church," 
says  Tarquini,  in  his  excellent  and  sound  work,  Les  principes 
du  droit  public  de  VEglise,  ''have  constantly  taught  that  the 
end  of  civil  society,  and  its  government,  must  be  subordinate 
to  the  Church,  as  the  body  is  to  the  soul."  The  same  thing 
is  affirmed  by  the  decisions  of  the  Holy  See.  Not  only  did 
Pius  IX.  condemn  the  42d  Proposition  of  the  Syllabus 
thus  formulated:  "In  cases  of  conflict  between  the  two 
powers  the  civil  power  prevails,"  but  in  his  Encyclical 
Quanta  Cura  Pius  IX.,  basing  his  decision  upon  the  words 
of  several  of  his  predecessors,  expressed  himself  in  these 
terms:  "  It  is  certain  that  it  is  the  interest  of  rulers,  whenever 
there  is  question  of  the  affairs  of  God,  carefully  to  follow 
the  order  which  He  has  prescribed,  and  to  yield,  and  not  to 
prefer  the  royal  will  to  that  of  the  priests  of  Christ." 

Third   Thesis. — The  Church    and  the  State  should  Mutually 
Help  Each  Other. 

The  conflicts  of  which  we  have  just  spoken  are  extremely 
to  be  regretted;  they  are  injurious  to  the  good  of  the  Church, 
as  well  as  to  that  of  the  State.  Hence  there  should  be 
between  the  two  powers,  as  Leo  XIII.  says,  "well-ordered 
relations,  analogous  to  those  which  constitute  in  man  the 
union  of  body  and  soul."  The  wise  providence  of  God, 
which  has  established  both  powers,  has  provided  for  their 
needs  by  tracing  the  relations  that  should  exist  between 
them.  These  relations  will  form  the  subject  of  the  present 
thesis. 


420  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

IV.  The  Church  Should  Aid  and  Protect  the  State. 

This  duty,  which  does  not  need  to  be  demonstrated,  the 
Church  does  not  dispute;  she  fulfils  it  by  her  teaching 
concerning  the  divine  origin  of  temporal  power,  and  the 
necessity  of  obedience  to  all  lawful  authority ;  by  her  prayers, 
her  sacraments,  and  her  worship,  which  help  subjects  to 
fulfil  their  civil  obUgations.  The  Church  is  even  obliged, 
when  necessary,  to  resort  to  spiritual  penalties  to  induce  her 
subjects  to  perform  their  duty  toward  the  State.  There 
may  be  even  circumstances  when  it  will  be  her  duty  to  help 
the  State  by  pecuniary  sacrifices,  by  relinquishing  some  of 
her  possessions,  etc. 

V.    The  Temporal  Power  Owes  Assistance  to 
THE  Church. 

1st.  Indirectly,  a.  By  causing  justice,  order,  and 
tranquilhty  to  reign  in  the  State,  in  order  that  the  Church 
may  be  able  to  exercise  efficaciously  her  salutary  influence. 

h.  By  refraining  from  violating  the  rights  of  the  Church, 
and  never  permitting  her  to  be  hampered  in  any  way  in  the 
fulfilment  of  her  divine  mission,  in  the  preaching  of  the 
Gospel,  in  the  exercise  of  her  worship,  in  the  administration 
of  the  sacraments  and  in  her  government. 

2d.  Directly.  The  State  owes  the  Church  positive  and 
direct  assistance,  without,  however,  going  outside  its  proper 
sphere.  Its  duty,  for  example,  is  to  make  laws  in  harmony 
with  the  divine  and  ecclesiastical  laws ;  to  sanction,  as  far  as 
circumstances  require  and  permit,  the  laws  of  the  Church, 
by  temporal  penalties;  to  provide,  if  necessary,  for  the 
maintenance  of  the  ministers  of  religion,  and  rehgious  worship 
itself.  Let  us  give  a  few  proofs  of  this  direct  duty,  which 
is  usually  contested. 

First  Argument,  drawn  from  the  Designs  of  God  Him- 
self.— God's  special  design,  together  with  His  glory,  is  the  eter- 


CERTAIN    PREROGATIVES    OF   THE    CHURCH.  421 

not  happiness  of  man.  If  He  delegates  a  part  of  His  authority, 
it  is  in  the  interest  of  this  supreme  end.  It  was  to  procure 
man  this  happiness  that  He  sent  His  Son  upon  earth,  that 
He  estabhshed  His  Church,  that  He  wills  its  extension  and 
its  freedom.  If  the  heads  of  government  receive  a  portion 
of  this  divine  authority,  if  they  can  exact  obedience  in  the 
name  of  God,  it  is,  no  doubt,  that  they  may  secure  peace  and 
temporal  prosperity,  but  they  must  make  these  blessings 
all  contribute  to  the  final  end  of  their  subjects.  The  latter, 
moreover,  cannot  seek  and  desire  the  things  of  this  world, 
except  in  as  far  as  they  serve  to  realize  their  eternal  destiny. 
Hence  depositaries  of  civil  power  use  it  lawfully  only  when 
it  serves  to  promote  this  same  end.  They  also  must  labor 
as  far  as  circumstances  permit,  and  in  the  limits  of  their 
sphere,  for  the  progress  of  the  true  religion,  the  only  religion 
which  leads  souls  to  salvation. 

Second  Argument,  drawn  from  the  Social  Royalty  op 
Jesus  Christ. — Jesus  Christ  is  God,  and  as  His  absolute 
sovereignty  over  all  that  exists  is  a  necessary  attribute  of 
His  divinity.  He  is  King  of  civil  societies,  as  well  as  of  families 
and  individuals.  This  royalty  is  clearly  proclaimed  in  the 
Old  as  well  as  in  the  New  Testament.  "Let  peoples  serve 
Thee  and  tribes  worship  Thee,''  said  Isaac,  prophetically 
addressing  the  Messias  (Gen.  xxvii.).  "All  the  kings  of  the 
earth  shall  adore  Him,"  says  David,  "all  nations  shall  serve 
Him"  (Psalms  Ixxi.).  "Kings  shall  be  His  ministers" 
(Isaias  Ix.).  "God  has  given  to  the  Son  of  man  power,  and 
glory,  and  a  kingdom :  and  all  peoples,  tribes,  and  tongues  shall 
serve  Him"  (Daniel  vii.).  "God,"  says  St.  Paul,  "hath 
exalted  Him,  and  hath  given  Him  a  name  which  is  above 
every  name:  that  in  the  name  of  Jesus  every  knee  should 
bow  of  those  that  are  in  heaven,  on  earth,  and  under  the 
earth"  (Philip,  ii.  9).  "God  has  subjected  all  things  under 
His  feet;  ...  He  hath  left  nothing  not  subject  to  Him" 
(Hebrews  ii.  8).  He  is  "King  of  kings  and  Lord  of  lords" 
(Apoc.    xix.    16).     We    know,    moreover,    the    categorical 


422  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

affirmation  of  Our  Saviour  Himself:  ''All  power  is  given  to 
Me  in  heaven  and  in  earth. "  ''All  things  have  been  given  to 
Me  by  the  Father. ' '  In  virtue  of  the  authority  which  essen- 
tially belongs  to  Him  as  God,  Jesus  Christ  could  have  as- 
sumed the  temporal  as  well  as  the  spiritual  sceptre  of  the 
entire  world.  He  has  not  done  so;  it  has  pleased  Him 
to  leave  to  earthly  rulers  power  over  purely  human  things. 
But  if  His  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world,  if  He  commands  us 
to  render  to  C£esar  the  things  which  are  Caesar's,  He  can- 
not permit  that  we  render  not  to  God  what  is  God's.  He 
has  made  His  religion  binding  not  only  upon  man  individ- 
ually, but  upon  societies ;  nations  as  well  as  individuals  must 
obey  the  law  of  the  Gospel,  and  the  depositaries  of  civil 
power  are  bound  to  see,  as  far  as  it  is  in  their  power,  that 
His  sovereign  will  is  carried  out. 

Third  Argument,  drawn  from  the  Welfare  of  the 
State  itself. — The  prosperity  of  the  State,  the  realization  of 
its  proper  and  immediate  end,  that  is,  the  temporal  happiness 
that  it  must  procure  its  members,  require  that  it  contribute, 
as  far  as  it  may,  to  the  prosperity  of  the  Church.  In  fact 
without  religion,  no  pubHc,  stable,  and  prosperous  society 
is  possible.  Religion  is  the  basis  of  society,  for  it  explains 
the  origin  of  society,  the  lawfulness  of  social  power,  gives  a 
solid  foundation  to  obedience,  and  causes  harmony,  justice, 
and  charity  to  reign  among  citizens.  Evidently  the  true 
religion,  that  which  contains  all  truth  unmixed  with  error, 
which  renders  to  God  the  worship  due  Him,  and  gives  man 
supernatural  strength  to  fulfil  his  duties,  is,  by  this  fact 
itself,  the  strongest  support  of  the  State,  and  a  powerful  aid 
in  the  attainment  of  its  proper  end. 

Fourth  Argument,  drawn  from  the  Formal  and  Ex- 
plicit Declaration  of  the  Church. — See,  for  example,  the 
Encyclical  of  Gregory  XVI.  in  1832,  of  Pius  IX.  in  1846,  and 
the  Propositions  55,  77,  and  78  of  the  Syllabus.  But  let  us 
hear  particularly  what  is  said  upon  this  subject  by  the  Pontiff 
gloriously  reigning :  "  Political  societies  cannot,  without  crime, 


CERTAIN    PREROGATIVES    OF   THE    CHURCH.  423 

conduct  themselves  as  though  God  existed  not  at  all,  or 
dispense  with  religion  as  something  foreign  and  useless,  or 
indifferently  admit  any  religion  according  to  their  good 
pleasure.  In  honoring  the  Divinity  they  must  follow 
strictly  the  rules  and  the  mode  of  worship  by  which  God 
declared  that  He  wished  to  be  honored.  The  heads  of  the 
State  must,  therefore,  hold  the  name  of  God  as  holy,  and 
rank  among  their  principal  obhgations  the  duty  of  protecting 
and  favoring  religion,  of  supporting  it  with  the  tutelary 
authority  of  the  laws,  and  of  avoiding  any  statutes  or  de- 
cisions contrary  to  its  safety  and  integrity.  .  .  .  Civil  society 
should,  in  favoring  public  prosperity,  provide  for  the  welfare 
of  the  citizens  in  such  a  way  as  not  only  to  place  no  obstacle 
to  religion,  but  to  afford  every  possible-  facility  for  the  pur- 
suit and  attainment  of  that  supreme  and  unchangeable  good 
to  which  they  aspire.  .  .  .  For  public  power  was  established 
for  the  benefit  of  the  governed,  and  though  its  immediate 
end  is  to  promote  the  temporal  prosperity  of  citizens,  it  is 
the  duty  of  rulers  not  to  diminish  but,  on  the  contrary,  to 
increase  man's  facihties  for  attaining  that  supreme  and  sov- 
ereign good  in  which  eternal  happiness  consists  and  which 
is  impossible  without  religion."  (Encycl.  already  quoted.) 
Remark. — ^We  have  just  stated,  taking  as  guide  the  encyc- 
lical Immortale  Dei  (on  Christian  States),  the  Catholic  doctrine 
in  regard  to  the  relations  which  should  exist  between  Church 
and  State.  In  this  statement  we  have  reasoned  from  an  abso- 
lute thesis,  without  taking  into  consideration  circumstances 
which,  at  the  present  day  particularly,  modify  these  relations  in 
the  interest  itself  of  both  societies.  We  shall  speak  later  (p. 
442  ff.)  of  these  modifications,  and  we  shall  explain  when  and 
why  a  Catholic  may  accept  a  constitution  which  deviates 
from  these  general  principles,  swear  allegiance  to  it,  and 
even  defend  it  at  need. 


424  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

ART.  v.— ON    LIBERALISM   AND    LIBERTY. 

I.  Notions  concerning  Liberalism.^ 

There  is  a  doctrine  diametrically  opposed  to  that  of  the 
Catholic  Church  regarding  her  powers  and  rights  and  her  re- 
lations to  the  State.     It  bears  falsely  the  name  of  Liberalism.^ 

^Pius  IX.,  Syllabus  of  1864;  Leo  XIIL,  Encyclicals  on  Socialism, 
etc.,  1878,  Matrimony,  1880,  Civil  Government,  1881,  Freemasonry, 
1884,  1892,  Christian  States,  1885,  Human  Liberty,  1888,  Christian 
Citizenship,  1890;  Apostolic  Letters  to  the  Emperor  of  Brazil,  1889, 
to  the  Bishops  of  Italy,  1890,  of  France,  1892,  of  Hungary,  1893;  Fallen, 
What  is  Liberalism?;  Brownson,  L  bera  ism  and  the  Church;  Br. 
W.vii.  305;  D.  R.  New  Ser.  xviii.  1,285,  xxv.  202,  xxvi.  204,  487, 
III.  Ser.  XV.  58. 

^  It  is  important,  above  all  things  not  to  confound  Liberalism 
as  it  existed  for  a  certain  period  with  the  Liberalism  of  the  present 
day,  for  one  differs  essentially  from  the  other.  Only  the  name  has 
been  retained,  the  more  easily  to  deceive  unthinking  minds. 

Formerly  Liberalism  meant  a  system,  or  rather  a  political  tendency, 
opposed  to  Centralism  or  Absolutism,  favoring  in  a  great  measure 
the  participation  of  the  citizens  in  the  government  of  the  State,  and 
procuring,  particularly,  a  large  autonomy  of  individuals  and  families, 
of  private  associations  communities,  and  provinces  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  their  own  interests.  It  was,  in  other  terms,  a  tendency 
favorable  to  politica  and  to  social  liberty.  In  this  acceptation  of 
the  term  it  is  evident  that  Catholics  would  be  excellent  Liberals,  or 
rather  that  they  alone,  at  the  present  day,  would  have  the  right  to  bear 
the  name.  Catholics  are  in  fact  wholly  favorable  to  political  and 
civil  liberty  as  we  shall  describe  it  elsewhere.  They  particularly' 
claim  for  each  one,  in  the  reasonable  limits  of  natual  law,  freedom 
to  dispose  of  his  person,  of  his  acts,  to  embrace  the  life  or  the  pro- 
fession he  pleases,  to  form  associations  for  an  honest  purpose,  to 
dispose  of  his  fortune  during  his  life  and  decree  by  will  the 
disposition  to  be  made  of  it  after  his  death  according  to  the  in- 
spiration of  his  conscience,  and  without  interference  on  the  part 
of  the  civil  power.  Catholics  desire  no  less  the  independence  of  their 
country,  and  freedom  to  govern  according  to  its  own  laws.  If  they 
live  under  a  government  which  admits  modern  liberties,  they  respect 
the  government  constituted  to  meet  the  present  needs  of  society, 
and  if  they  complain,  it  is  only  when  unjust  restrictions  violate  the 


CERTAIN   PREROGATIVES   OF   THE   CHURCH.  425 

We  say  falsely,  because  it  is  far  from  teaching  and  upholding 
true  hberty.  It  is  not  easy  to  give  a  precise  and  full  defini- 
tion of  liberalism,  for  the  simple  reason  that  it  is  really 
a  purely  negative  system,  something  like  Protestantism, 
and,  Uke  this,  susceptible  of  numerous  shades.  We  shall 
distinguish  three  classes  of  hberals,  to  which  others  can 
easily  be  assigned. 

A.  Radicals,  or  Radical  Liberals. — They  are  rightly  so 
called,  because  by  removing  every  religious  restraint  they 
strike  at  the  very  roots  and  foundations  of  the  social  order. 
Of  these  Pope  Leo  XIIL  says,  in  his  famous  encyclical  on 
Human  Liberty:  "The  partisans  of  naturalism  and  of 
rationalism  are  in  philosophy  what  the  abettors  of  Hberal- 
ism  are  in  the  moral  and  civil  order,  since  they  introduce 
into  morals  and  practical  hfe  the  principles  laid  down  by 
the  partisans  of  naturalism.  According  to  them,  in  practical 
life  there  is  no  divine  power  which  they  are  bound  to  obey, 
but  each  one  is  a  law  unto  himself.  This  gives  rise  to  that 
morality  called  independent  and  which,  under  an  appearance 
of  liberty,  turns  the  will  from  the  observance  of  the  divine 
precepts  and  leads  man  to  unhmited  hcense."^ 

Critique. — 1st.  Between  the  Cathohc  Church  and  radi- 
cal hberalism,  which  is  really  identical  with  naturalism 
and  free  thought,  there  is  evidently  positive  and  complete 
opposition.  We  do  not  need  to  refute  it;  we  have  already 
done  so  in  demonstrating  the  existence  of  a  rehgion 
revealed  by  God,  and  how  all  men  are  obhged  to  embrace 


liberty  of  citizens  and  the  rights  made  sacred  by  the  Constitution  of 
their  country. — Author. 

Besides  this  Political  Liberalism  there  is  a  system  of  political  econ- 
omy sometimes  called  Economic  Liberalism  (see  Devas,  Polit.  Econ- 
0"^y>  P-  552).  Both  systems  are  to  a  certain  extent  represented  by 
the  famous  Liberal  Party  of  England.  Our  treatise  has  nothing:  to 
do  Avith  either  system,  being  concerned  exclusively  with  Liberalism 
in  Religion. — Editor. 

^  Ming,  Data  of  Modern  Ethics,  ch.  10,  11 ;  Lilly,  Right  and  Wrong. 


426  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

the  Catholic  faith  under  pain  of  failing  to  attain  the  end  for 
which  they  were  created. 

2d.  It  is  not  difficult  to  see  the  inevitable  and  disastrous 
effects  of  such  a  doctrine.  It  is  of  the  greatest  possible  in  jury- 
to  the  individual  as  well  as  to  society.  The  Holy  Father 
demonstrates  this  with  great  clearness  and  convincing  logic: 
*  ^  To  desire  that  there  be  no  tie  between  man  or  civil  society 
and  God,  the  Creator  and,  consequently,  the  supreme  Legis- 
lator of  all  things,  is  contrary  to  nature ;  ...  to  make  good 
and  evil  dependent  upon  the  judgment  of  human  reason  alone, 
is  to  suppress  the  proper  distinction  between  good  and  evil; 
there  will  be  no  longer  any  real  difference  between  what  is 
wrong  and  what  is  right,  save  in  the  opinion  and  judgment  of 
the  individual ;  whatsoever  pleases  him  becomes  lawful.  Once 
we  admit  such  moral  doctrine,  which  is  powerless  to  subdue 
or  appease  the  disorderly  movements  of  the  soul,  we  open  the 
way  to  all  the  corruptions  of  life.  .  .  .  Once  we  repudiate  the 
power  of  God  over  man  and  over  human  society,  it  is  natural 
that  society  should  no  longer  have  any  religion,  and  that 
everything  relating  to  religion  should  become  to  it  a  matter 
of  complete  indifference.  Armed  with  the  idea  of  its  sover- 
eignty, the  multitude  will  be  easily  led  into  sedition  and 
revolt,  and,  the  curb  of  duty  and  of  conscience  no  longer 
existing,  force  will  be  the  only  resource — force,  which  is  of 
little  avail  by  itself  to  restrain  the  passions  of  the  populace. 
We  have  a  proof  of  this  in  the  almost  daily  warfare  waged 
against  sociahstic  and  other  seditious  sects  which  have  been 
trying  so  long  to  destroy  the  State  to  its  very  foundation. 
Let,  then,  impartial  minds  judge  and  decide  whether  such 
doctrines  are  conducive  to  true  liberty  and  are  worthy  of 
man,  or  whether  they  are  not  rather  the  ruin  and  complete 
destruction  of  society."     (Encycl.  cit.) 

B.  There  is  another  kind  of  Liberals,  called  by  Leo  XIII. 
Social  or  State  Liberals.  They  do  not  formally  deny  all 
dependence  of  man  upon  God;  they  are  satisfied  to  affirm 
the  absolute  independence  of  civil  society  as  a  society.    Ac- 


CERTAIN   PREROGATIVES   OF   THE    CHURCH.  427 

cording  to  them,  the  divine  laws  must  regulate  the  life  and 
conduct  of  individuals,  but  not  that  of  governments  or  states. 
They  would  have  it  lawful  in  public  things  to  deviate  from 
the  commands  of  God,  and  to  legislate  without  any  regard 
to  them;  the  pernicious  consequence  of  this  is  the  Separation 
of  Church  and  State  and  the  axiom  of  No  Religion  in 
Politics.^ 

This  milder  Liberalism  may  be  defined  as  the  doctrine  which 
claims  for  civil  society  an  absolute  independence  in  regard 
to  rehgion.  Or,  again,  the  pohtical  school  which  admits 
but  one  sovereign  authority,  the  State,  and  denies  the  neces- 
sary coexistence,  distinction,  and  harmony  of  the  two 
powers,  temporal  and  spiritual.  It  may  also  be  called 
social  rationalism.  It  declares  the  people  as  a  nation,  and 
civil  powers  of  all  degrees,  exempt  from  every  obligation,  and 
every  duty  toward  any  rehgious  authority  whatever.  To 
them  Christian  revelation,  Jesus  Christ  its  Author,  the 
Church  which  He  established  and  which  represents  Him 
on  earth,  are  as  if  they  did  not  exist;  they  do  not  even  know 
if  Jesus  Christ  is  God.  They  have  not  to  concern  themselves 
mth  this  question,  which  belongs,  they  say,  to  individuals; 
the  existence  of  Jesus  Christ  and  of  His  Church  in  no  way 
affects  the  action  of  the  State  and  its  various  powers.  Thus, 
for  example,  when  the  legislature  makes  laws,  the  executive 
power,  and  the  courts  in  applying  them,  have  no  need  to 
consider  whether  these  laws  are  or  are  not  conformable  to 
the  law  of  God,  to  the  express  will  of  Jesus  Christ,  to  the 
rights  which  He  conferred  upon  His  Church.  Such  liberals 
allege  that  though  a  man  as  an  individual  is  free  to  live  in 
private  life  as  a  Christian,  he  is  forbidden  to  act  as  such  in 
his  public  life  and  in  the  exercise  of  his  functions. 

Another  consequence  of  these  liberal  principles  is  that 
where  the  State  undertakes  the  work  of  instruction  or  public 
education  its  teaching,  called  neutral  or  unsectarian,  must 

>  I.  E.  R.,  Sep.  '94;  M.  S.  H.,  June  1901;  U.  B.,  Jan.  '97. 


428  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

be  atheistic,  godless,  without  any  religion;  for  all  opinions, 
they  say,  must  be  respected.  As  to  ethics  or  moral  teaching, 
they  are  wary,  it  is  true,  of  committing  themselves,  and  to 
deceive  simple  minds  they  talk  of  independent,  lay  morality, 
etc.  As  if  there  could  be  a  binding  rule  of  morality  without 
a  supreme  legislator  and  adequate  sanction.  How  could  it 
be  imposed  upon  the  conscience,  deprived  as  it  is  of  the 
truths  on  which  it  must  necessarily  rest? 

Critique. — 1st.  State  liberahsm,  though  less  impious,  no 
doubt,  than  radical  liberalism,  is  nevertheless  the  antithesis 
of  the  doctrine  which  we  stated  in  regard  to  the  relations 
which  should,  in  principle,  exist  between  the  two  powers. 
We  have  refuted  it  by  establishing  our  thesis  with  solid 
proofs.  Hence  a  faithful  child  of  the  Church  cannot  hesi- 
tate upon  this  point.  For  it  is  to  be  noted  that  these 
liberals  present  their  doctrines  as  absolute  truth;  according 
to  them  it  flows  from  principles  of  reason,  and  is  conse- 
quently apphcable  to  all  times  and  to  all  places.  Here 
is  the  judgment  formulated  by  Leo  XIII.  on  this  subject: 
'Tor  such  a  state  of  things  to  exist  a  civil  community  must 
needs  have  no  duty  toward  God,  or  be  able  to  disregard  it 
with  impunity,  which  is  equally  and  manifestly  false.  It  is 
a  matter  beyond  doubt  that  the  union  of  men  in  society  is 
the  work  of  the  will  of  God,  whether  we  consider  the  society 
in  its  members,  in  its  form  which  is  authority,  in  its  cause,  or 
in  the  number  and  importance  of  the  advantages  which  it 
affords  man.  God  made  man  for  society,  and  to  unite  him 
with  his  fellow  beings,  in  order  that  the  needs  of  his  nature, 
which  his  individual  efforts  could  not  supply,  might  find 
satisfaction  in  the  association.  For  this  reason  civil  society, 
as  a  society,  must  necessarily  recognize  God  as  its  Principle 
and  as  its  Author,  and  consequently  render  to  His  power  and 
to  His  authority  the  homage  of  its  worship.  Neither  in 
the  name  of  reason  nor  of  justice  can  the  State  be  atheistic, 
or  adopt  a  system  which  would  result  in  atheism,  that  is, 
treat  all  religions  alike,  and  grant  them  equal  rights.     Hence, 


CERTAIN    PREROGATIVES    OF   THE    CHURCH.  429 

as  it  is  necessary  to  profess  a  religion  in  society,  it  must  be  the 
one  true  religion,  readily  recognized,  at  least  in  Catholic 
countries,  by  the  striking  marks  of  truth  which  it  bears. 
This  religion  the  heads  of  the  State,  therefore,  are  bound  to 
preserve  and  protect  if  they  would  fulfil  their  obligation  to 
provide  prudently  and  profitably  for  the  interest  of  the 
community.  For  public  power  was  established  for  the 
benefit  of  the  governed;  and  though  its  immediate  end  is  to 
promote  the  temporal  prosperity  of  citizens,  it  is  the  duty 
of  rulers  not  to  diminish  but,  on  the  contrary,  to  increase 
man's  facility  for  attaining  the  supreme  and  sovereign  good 
in  which  eternal  happiness  consists,  and  which  is  impossible 
without  religion."     (Encycl.  cit.) 

2d.  If  these  State  liberals  were  logical,  there  would  be 
a  fatal  outbreak  of  radicalism,  as  in  fact  there  has  been 
among  those  who  consistently  followed  their  principles. 

In  reality  radical  liberals  alone  are  logical.  If  God  has 
no  authority  over  man  as  a  social  being,  i.e.,  when  associated 
with  his  fellows  in  earthly  pursuits,  why  should  He  have  any 
authority  over  man  in  his  private  life?  Has  He,  perhaps, 
created  man  for  society  in  order  that  he  may  thus  withdraw 
in  part  from  the  sovereign  dominion  of  his  Creator?  Has 
He  communicated  a  part  of  His  power  to  civil  authorities  in 
order  that  they  may  turn  their  subjects  from  the  fulfilment 
of  certain  duties  toward  the  Divinity?  God  is  either  Master 
of  man,  everywhere  and  always,  or  He  is  not  Master  at  all. 
The  nihihsts  of  Russia  and  the  anarchists  of  all  countries 
are  only  carrying  out  the  logical  consequences  of  these  Hberal 
principles.  It  is  true,  as  the  Pope  causes  us  to  remark,  that 
the  partisans  of  liberahsm  do  not  give  complete  assent  to 
such  doctrines.  Alarmed  by  the  enormity  of  their  claims, 
and  appreciating  perhaps  that  they  are  in  opposition  with 
truth,  they  would  have  reason  remain  subject  to  the  natural 
law  and  to  the  divine,  eternal  law;  but  they  do  not  admit 
that  a  man  should  submit  to  laws  which  it  might  please  God 
to  impose  upon  him  in  some  other  way  than  by  means  of 


430  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

natural  reason.  The  Pope  has  no  difficulty  in  demonstrating 
that  on  this  point  hberals  contradict  themselves. 

3d.  Of  the  disastrous  effects  of  this  liberahsm  we  shall  soon 
see  more  in  the  paragraph  on  '' Modern  Liberties."  Suffice 
it  to  say  that  the  work  of  this  system  usually  goes  much 
farther  than  its  professions.  It  is  not  satisfied  with  affecting 
indifference  toward  religion;  it  is  frequently  its  avowed  and 
positive  enemy,  as  its  words  and  actions  prove.  Look  at 
what  has  taken  place  recently  and  what  is  still  taking  place 
in  countries  where  liberahsm  rules.  It  is  not  difficult  to 
recognize  that  the  famous  separation  of  Church  and  State 
is  in  reality  only  the  absorption  of  the  Church  by  the  State, 
or  the  persecution  of  the  Church  by  the  State.  The  ideal 
of  liberalism  is  the  old  pagan  Csesarism.  It  means  the 
head  of  the  government,  whether  one  or  many,  wielding  both 
the  material  and  the  spiritual  sword,  and  thus  monopolizing 
the  control  of  education,  constituting  itself  the  sole  teacher 
of  society.  Where  the  laws  and  the  pubhc  conscience  do  not 
permit  it  to  realize  this  ideal  it  approximates  as  closely  as 
possible  to  it  by  administrative  measures  as  perfidious  as 
they  are  numerous.  There  is,  however,  a  difference  between 
the  present  persecution  and  that  of  former  times:  to-day 
it  is  universal  and  the  selfsame  everywhere,  its  purpose 
being  the  complete  destruction  of  the  one  true  Church  of 
Jesus  Christ.  The  reason  of  this  is  that  the  real  source  of 
the  persecution  is  none  other  than  Freemasonry,  of  which 
liberalism  is  the  willing  servant. 

C.  We  must  here  mention  a  third  kind  of  liberahsm  which, 
under  many  various  forms,  has  appeared  at  different  periods 
of  the  Church's  history.  It  took  a  more  definite  and  tangible 
form  during  the  last  century  and  has  been  called  ''CathoHc 
Liberahsm"  or  "Liberal  Catholicism."^ 

^  This  latter  term  is  used  in  the  celebrated  joint  Pastoral  Letter 
upon  this  subject  addressed  to  their  flock  by  the  Catholic  hierarchy 
of  England,  Dec.  29,  1900.  It  was  submitted  to  the  judgment  of 
the  Holy  Father,  who,  in  turn,  sent  a  most  flattering  letter  to  the 


CEKTAIN    PKEROGATIVES   OF   THE   CHURCH.  431 

It  is  hardly  to  be  expected  that  among  Catholics  living 
in  an  atmosphere  saturated  with  the  fatal  germs  of  Uberalism 
there  will  not  be  a  few  here  and  there  contaminated  by  its 
teaching.  It  is  not  unusual,  therefore,  to  find  men  who, 
heartily  attached  to  the  Church,  and  with  a  laudable  desire 
to  further  what  they  consider  her  true  interests,  will  try  to 
effect  an  impossible  compromise  or  reconciliation  between 
the  doctrines  of  HberaHsm  and  those  of  the  Church;  they 
will  indulge  in  baseless  dreams  of  a  future  when  the  spiritual 
and  temporal  power  will  be  absolutely  independent  one  of 
the  other.  They  will  deem  it  a  prudent  policy  on  the  part  of 
the  Church  to  pass  over  in  silence  Catholic  truths  opposed  to 
current  errors;  to  refrain  from  asserting  certain  rights  which 
conflict  with  what  are  called  modern  ideas.  Hence,  without 
denying  the  teaching  and  unerring  authority  of  the  Church, 
they  would,  nevertheless,  that  the  body  of  doctrines  imposed 
as  of  faith  upon  aU  men  be  confined  within  the  smallest 
possible  limits,  minimized,  while  free  speculation  and  discus- 
sion of  rehgious  as  well  as  philosophic  questions  must  be  given 
the  widest  range;  dogmas  already  proclaimed  must  be  al- 
lowed a  wider  and  more  liberal  interpretation  in  accordance 
with  the  advance  and  development  of  modern  ideas  and 
science;  the  decrees  of  the  Roman  Congregations,  especially 
the  Holy  Office  and  the  Index,  ought  to  be  few  and  far 
between,  lest  they  become  so  many  stumbling-blocks  to 
CathoHc  philosophers  and  scientists.  Doctrines  offensive  and 
distasteful  to  non-Cathohcs  should  not  be  too  loudly  preached 
from  the  pulpit,  lest  these  people,  instead  of  joining  the  fold, 
turn  against  the  Church.  Again,  admitting  the  power  of 
the  Church  "to  bind  and  to  loose,"  liberal  Cathohcs  find 
much  to  criticise  in  the  present  legislation  and  discipHne 

English  bishops,  praising  them  for  their  "timely  and  prudent  exhorta- 
tion." For,  he  says,  "too  well  known  is  the  actual  and  threatening 
mischief  of  that  body  of  fallacious  opinions  which  is  commonly  des- 
ignated as  '  Liberal  Catholicism.' "  The  Pastoral  is  found  in  the 
M.  S.  H.,  Feb.  1901. 


432  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

of  the  Church  restricting  individual  liberty  (religious  orders, 
marriage,  rights  of  the  laity,  relations  with  the  State,  secret 
societies,  communion  with  the  sects,  etc.);  there  is  too 
much  *'  mediae valism  "  and  "  ultramontanism ''  in  the  Church, 
which,  hke  a  dead  weight,  keeps  her  ''behind  the  times.'' ^ 

''The  principles  on  which  the  new  opinions  we  have  men- 
tioned are  based  may  be  reduced  to  this:  that  in  order  the 
more  easily  to  bring  over  to  Catholic  doctrine  those  who  dissent 
from  it,  the  Church  ought  to  adapt  herself  somewhat  to  our 
advanced  civilization,  and,  relaxing  her  ancient  rigor,  show 
some  indulgence  to  modern  popular  theories  and  methods. 
Many  think  that  this  is  to  be  understood  not  only  with 
regard  to  the  rule  of  hfe,  but  also  to  the  doctrines  in  which 
the  deposit  of  faith  is  contained.  For  they  contend  that  it  is 
opportune,  in  order  to  work  in  a  more  attractive  way  upon 
the  wills  of  those  who  are  not  in  accord  with  us,  to  pass  over 
certain  heads  of  doctrine,  as  if  of  lesser  moment,  or  to  so 
soften  them  that  they  may  not  have  the  same  meaning  which 
the  Church  has  invariably  held.  .  .  .  The  followers  of  these 
novelties  judge  that  a  certain  liberty  ought  to  be  introduced 
into  the  Church,  so  that,  limiting  the  exercise  and  vigilance 
of  its  powers,  each  one  of  the  faithful  may  act  more  freely 
in  pursuance  of  his  own  natural  bent  and  capacity.  They 
affirm,  namely,  that  this  is  called  for  in  order  to  imitate  that 
liberty  which,  though  quite  recently  introduced,  is  now  the 
law  and  the  foundation  of  almost  every  civil  community." 

To  the  above  demands  of  liberal  CathoHcism  the  Pope 
answers  in  the  same  letter  as  follows:  "Few  words  are 
needed  to  show  how  reprehensible  is  the  plan  that  is  thus 
conceived,  if  we  but  consider  the  character  and  origin  of  the 
doctrine   which  the   Church  hands   down  to  us.     On  that 

*  This  paragraph  has  been  slightly  modified  by  the  editor,  who  has 
also  added  the  following  extracts  from  the  letter  of  Leo  XIII.  to 
Cardinal  Gibbons,  Jan.  22, 1899.  See  also  Rickaby,  Oxf.  Conf.,  s.  ii.; 
Tyrrell,  Faith  of  Mill.,  I.,  p.  68;  Ward,  Geo.,  Doctr.  Auth.,  Essays  1-4; 
M.  S.  H.,  Feb.  1901;  I.  E.  R.,  March  1903;  M.,  May  1898. 


CERTAIN    PREROGATIVES    OF   THE    CHURCH.  433 

point  the  Vatican  Council  says :  '  The  doctrine  of  faith  which 
God  has  revealed  is  not  proposed  like  a  theory  of  philosophy 
which  is  to  be  elaborated  by  the  human  understanding,  but 
as  a  divine  deposit  delivered  to  the  Spouse  of  Christ  to  be 
faithfully  guarded  and  infalhbly  declared.  .  .  .  That  sense  of 
the  sacred  dogmas  is  to  be  faithfully  kept  which  Holy  Mother 
Church  has  once  declared,  and  is  not  to  be  departed  from  under 
the  specious  pretext  of  a  more  profound  understanding. ' 

''Nor  is  the  suppression  to  be  considered  altogether  free 
from  blame  which  designedly  omits  certain  principles  of 
Catholic  doctrine  and  buries  them,  as  it  were,  in  oblivion. 
For  there  is  the  one  and  the  same  Author  and  Master  of 
all  the  truths  that  Christian  teaching  comprises,  the  only- 
begotten  Son  who  is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father.  That  they 
are  adapted  to  all  ages  and  nations  is  plainly  deduced  from 
the  words  which  Christ  addressed  to  His  apostles:  Going 
therefore,  teach  ye  all  nations:  teaching  them  to  observe  all 
things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you:  and  behold  I  am 
with  you  all  days,  even  to  the  consummation  of  the  world. 
Wherefore  the  same  Vatican  Council  says:  'By  the  divine 
and  Cathohc  faith  those  things  are  to  be  beUeved  which  are 
contained  in  the  word  of  God,  either  written  or  handed  down, 
and  are  proposed  by  the  Church,  whether  in  solemn  decision 
or  by  the  ordinary  universal  magisterium,  to  be  beheved  as 
having  been  divinely  revealed. '  Far  be  it,  then,  from  any  one 
to  diminish  or  for  any  reason  whatever  to  pass  over  anything 
of  this  divinely  delivered  doctrine;  whosoever  would  do  so 
would  rather  wish  to  alienate  Cathohcs  from  the  Church 
than  to  bring  over  to  the  Church  those  who  dissent  from  it. 
...  If  anything  is  suggested  by  the  infallible  teaching  of  the 
Church,  it  is  certainly  that  no  one  should  wish  to  withdraw 
from  it,  nay,  that  all  should  strive  to  be  thoroughly  imbued 
with  and  be  guided  by  its  spirit,  in  order  to  be  the  more  easily 
preserved  from  any  private  error  whatsoever.  To  this  we 
may  add  that  those  who  argue  in  that  wise  quite  set  aside  the 
wisdom  and  providence  of  God;   who,  when  He  desired  in 


434  CHRISTIAN    APOLOGETICS. 

that  very  solemn  decision  to  affirm  the  authority  and  teaching 
office  of  the  Apostohc  See,  desired  it  especially  in  order  the 
more  efficaciously  to  guard  the  minds  of  Catholics  from  the 
dangers  of  the  present  times.  The  license  which  is  commonly 
confounded  with  liberty;  the  passion  for  saying  and  reviling 
everything;  the  habit  of  thinking  and  of  expressing  every- 
thing in  print,  have  cast  such  deep  shadows  on  men's  minds 
that  there  is  now  greater  utility  and  necessity  for  this  office 
of  teaching  than  ever  before,  lest  men  should  be  drawn  away 
from  conscience  and  duty.  It  is  far  indeed  from  our  inten- 
tion to  repudiate  all  that  the  genius  of  the  time  begets;  nay, 
rather,  whatever  the  search  for  truth  attains,  or  the  effort 
after  good  achieves,  will  always  be  welcome  by  us,  for  it 
increases  the  patrimony  of  doctrine  and  enlarges  the  limits 
of  public  prosperity.  But  all  this,  to  possess  real  utiUty, 
should  thrive  without  setting  aside  the  authority  and  wisdom 
of  the  Church.'' 

In  regard  to  the  laws  and  discipline  of  the  Church  the 
Pope  says:  ''The  rule  of  hfe  which  is  laid  down  for  CathoUcs 
is  not  of  such  a  nature  as  not  to  admit  modifications,  according 
to  the  diversity  of  time  and  place.  The  Church  indeed 
possesses  what  her  Author  has  bestowed  on  her,  a  kind  and 
merciful  disposition ;  for  which  reason  from  the  very  beginning 
she  willingly  showed  herself  to  be  what  Paul  proclaimed  in  his 
own  regard :  /  became  all  things  to  all  men,  that  I  might  save  all. 
The  history  of  all  past  ages  is  witness  that  the  Apostolic 
See,  to  which  not  only  the  office  of  teaching,  but  also  the 
supreme  government  of  the  whole  Church,  was  committed, 
has  constantly  adhered  to  the  same  doctrine,  in  the  same 
sense  and  in  the  same  mind;  but  it  has  always  been  accustomed 
to  so  modify  the  rule  of  life  that,  while  keeping  the  divine 
right  inviolate,  it  has  never  disregarded  the  manners  and 
customs  of  the  various  nations  which  it  embraces.  If  re- 
quired for  the  salvation  of  souls,  who  will  doubt  that  it  is 
ready  to  do  so  at  the  present  time?  But  this  is  not  to  be 
determined  by  the  will  of  private  individuals,  who  are  mostly 


CERTAIN   PREROGATIVES   OF  THE   CHURCH.  435 

deceived  by  the  appearance  of  right,  but  ought  to  be  left  to 
the  judgment  of  the  Church.  He  who  would  have  Christian 
virtues  to  be  adapted,  some  to  one  age  and  others  to  another, 
has  forgotten  the  words  of  the  Apostle:  Whom  He  foreknew 
He  also  predestinated  to  be  made  conformable  to  the  image  of  His 
Son.  The  Master  and  exemplar  of  all  sanctity  is  Christ,  to 
whose  rule  all  must  conform  who  wish  to  attain  to  the  throne 
of  the  blessed.  Now,  Christ  does  not  change  with  the 
progress  of  the  ages,  but  is  yesterday  and  to-day,  and  the 
same  forever.  To  the  men  of  all  time  is  addressed  the 
lesson:  Learn  of  Me  because  I  am  meek  and  humble  of  heart; 
and  at  all  times  Christ  shows  Himself  to  us  as  becoming 
obedient  unto  death,  and  in  every  age  also  the  word  of  the 
Apostle  holds:  And  they  that  are  Christ^ s  have  crucified  their 
flesh  with  the  vices  and  concupiscences.  Would  that  more 
would  cultivate  those  virtues  in  our  day,  after  the  example 
of  the  holy  men  of  the  past!  Those  who  by  humbleness  of 
spirit,  by  obedience  and  abstinence,  were  powerful  in  word 
and  work,  were  powerful  aids  not  only  to  religion  but  to  the 
State  and  society." 

II.  Modern  Liberties.* 

A.  Their  Nature. — Liberalism  is  in  its  very  nature  the 
father  and  the  abettor  of  what  are  called  modem  liberties. 
It  boasts,  moreover,  of  having  given  rise  to  them,  and  pro- 
claims them  the  great  and  immortal  conquests  of  our  times. 
Thus  liberalism  may  also  be  defined  as  the  doctrine  which 
recognizes  the  same  rights  in  evil  as  in  good,  in  error  as  in 

*  Leo  XIII.,  Encycl.  on  Human  Liberty;  Lilly,  W.  S.,  chapters  on 
European  History,  Shibboleths,  A  Century  of  Revolution;  Manning, 
Essays,  HI.  Ser.  (Liberty  of  the  Press) ;  Hergenrother,  Catholic  Church 
and  State,  I.,  Essay  5;  Br.  W.,  vi.  520,  xv.;  A.  C.  Q.  viii.;  C.  W.  xxix. 
852,  xxxvii.  289,  741;  M.  xlviii.  200;  D.  R.  New  Ser.  iv.  517,  xxvii. 
1,  555;  xxviii.  1,  503,  xxix.  193,  III.  Ser.  xx.  118.  Confer  Commenta- 
ries on  the  Syllabus  of  Pius  IX.  On  the  Roman  Index  see  Baart, 
Roman  Court,  etc.;  C.  W.  xiv.  55;  Br.  W.  vi.  520. 


436  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

truth,  and  consequently  professes  that  all  opinions  must  be 
respected.  It  is  the  system  which  preaches  and  favors 
everywhere  those  modern  liberties.  Let  us,  then,  consider 
them  in  themselves  and  in  their  effects,  and  estabhsh  in  the 
next  paragraph  a  rule  of  action  in  regard  to  political  constitu- 
tions based  upon  these  liberties. 

Leo  XIII.  in  enumerating  modem  liberties  names  succes- 
sively liberty  of  conscience  and  of  worship,  liberty  of  the  press, 
liberty  of  education  or  instruction,  to  which  we  shall  add 
liberty  of  association.  Let  us  briefly  explain  them,  following 
the  same  guide,  and  learn  how  we  are  to  regard  them.  Liberty 
of  worship,  which  is  also  frequently  called  liberty  of  con- 
science,^ grants  to  every  man  the  right  to  profess  whatever 
religion  he  pleases,  or  even  to  profess  none  at  all.  This  same 
liberty,  considered  from  the  social  point  of  view,  would 
forbid  the  State  to  render  worship  to  God,  or  authorize  any 
public  worship;  no  religion  or  church  must  be  preferred 
to  another;  all  religions  have  equal  claims,  regardless  of  the 
faith  of  the  people,  even  though  it  were  all  Catholic.  Liberty 
of  the  press  means  the  right  of  each  one  to  express  by  the  pen, 
to  propagate  by  writings,  any  doctrines  whatsoever  on  moral, 
political,  social,  philosophic,  and  religious  matters,  falsehood 
even  as  truth,  however  much  they  may  savor  of  impiety 
and  immorality.  Liberty  of  education  proclaims  the  natu- 
ral right  of  every  one  to  propagate  these  same  doctrines 
by  private  and  public  instruction.  Liberty  of  association 
asserts  the  right  of  forming  any  societies  or  imions  whatever, 
though  they  be  secret  and  dangerous  to  religion  and  society. 
Let  us  not  forget  that  it  is  not  a  question  here  of  simple 
tolerance,  but  of  the  acknowledgment  of  what  is  declared 
to  be  a  natural,  sacred,  and  imprescriptible  right.  Then 
remember  that  a  right  is  a  moral  power,  and  that  the  right 
of  one  man  always  implies  in  other  men  and  in  rulers  the 

1  See  O'Reilly,  ch.  22;  Holaind,  Nat.  Law,  1.  4;  I.  E.  R.,  July  '96. 
Later  on,  speaking  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes,  we  shall  explain  a  very  im- 
portant distinction  between  liberty  of  conscience  and  that  of  worship. 


CERTAIN   PREROGATIVES   OF  THE  CHURCH.  437 

duty  of  respecting  it  and  making  it  respected.  It  is  true 
certain  restrictions  have  been  formulated  in  regard  to  the 
use  of  these  hberties,  but  these  restrictions,  while  in  them- 
selves quite  illogical,  remain  usually  a  mere  matter  of  theory, 
to  be  forgotten  in  practice.  In  the  eyes  of  the  modem  State 
it  is  no  longer  an  impious  crime  to  proclaim  in  public  the 
non-existence  of  a  God/ 

B.  Their  Falsity. — They  are  false  in  principle.  We 
have  shown  that  the  Catholic  reUgion  alone  is  true  and 
binding  upon  all  men,  and  that  this  rehgion  is  identified  with 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  This  Church  alone,  by  the 
will  of  God,  has  the  right  to  exist  and  to  spread  throughout 
the  world,  to  demand  faith  and  obedience  from  all  men,  as 
every  man  is  boimd  to  seek  his  salvation  and  thus  to  attain 
his  last  end.  Every  doctrine  opposed  to  her  teaching, 
and  all  morals  contrary  to  her  moral  law,  are  condemned 
without  further  proof  or  appeal.  Neither  rehgious  error 
nor  moral  evil,  the  two  deadly  poisons  for  the  intellect  and 
the  will,  can  ever  have  any  right  of  existence  or  propagation. 

It  follows,  moreover,  that  no  individual  or  government  may 
lawfully  place  any  obstacle  to  the  exercise  of  this  exclusive 
right  of  the  Catholic  Church.  In  fact  right  and  duty  are 
correlative  terms;  the  right  of  one  person  necessarily  implies 
the  duty  of  others  to  respect  that  right.  Again,  therefore,  it 
follows  that  neither  individual  nor  government  can  lawfully 
claim  for  error  or  evil,  heresy,  godlessness,  and  immorality  a 
natural  right  to  exist  or  expand.  Error  and  evil  have  no 
such  right;  on  the  contrary,  it  belongs  exclusively  to  truth 
and  goodness.  Herein  we  find  in  principle  the  inevitable 
condemnation  of  these  modern  liberties.  Indeed  what  else 
are  they  but  the  proclamation  of  the  rights  of  error  and 
evil,  and  the  open  refusal  to  respect  and  protect  rights  be- 

*  Needless  to  say  that  we  treat  of  the  liberties  of  the  press,  speech, 
and  association  only  from  the  religious  standpoint.  As  long  as 
dogma  and  morality  are  not  touched,  the  religious  authority  will  not 
interfere,  else  it  would  go  beyond  its  power. 


438  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

longing  exclusively  to  the  Catholic  Church?  This  is  clearly 
implied  in  the  description  given  above  of  these  liberties. 

C.  Their  Fatal  Consequences. — The  illustrious  Pontiff 
has  no  difficulty  in  demonstrating  that  these  alleged  liberties, 
understood  in  this  way,  are  contrary  not  only  to  faith  but 
to  reason  itself.  He  makes  it  clearly  evident  how  disastrous 
their  application  must  be,  and  in  reality  is,  to  individuals, 
to  famihes,  and  to  society.  '^The  evils  of  the  present  time, 
the  number  and  gravity  of  which  we  cannot  ignore,  have 
arisen  in  great  part,''  he  says,  ''from  these  much-vaunted 
liberties,  which  it  was  beheved  contained  the  germs  of  salva- 
tion and  of  glory.  Facts  have  destroyed  this  hope.  Instead 
of  sweet  and  salutary  fruit,  bitter  and  poisonous  fruits  have 
been  the  result."  Let  us  indicate  briefly  a  few  of  the  fatal 
effects  produced  by  the  apphcation  of  liberal  doctrines. 

First  effect:  The  gradual  weakening  and  extinction  of 
faith  and  religion.  It  is  almost  impossible  for  even  intel- 
hgent  men  wholly  to  escape  the  influence  of  their  social 
environment.  If  it  present  the  spectacle  of  religious  indif- 
ference, how  will  they  remain  attached  in  heart  and  soul 
to  rehgion?  How  will  they  have  the  courage  to  practise 
all  their  duties  faithfully?  When  the  masses,  particularly 
children  and  the  uneducated,  see  the  agents  of  the  govern- 
ment indifferent  to  the  Catholic  religion,  affecting  to  make 
no  distinction  between  rehgious  truth  and  error,  their  moral 
and  Christian  sense  will  necessarily  be  weakened,  and  they, 
in  their  turn,  will  regard  religion  as  a  thing  of  secondary 
or  no  importance. 

Moreover,  an  evil  press  and  neutral,  that  is  to  say,  godless 
teaching  will  insensibly  but  surely  stifle  the  faith  in  the 
hearts  of  the  people.  For  this  reason  Hberahsm,  trusting  to 
these  inevitable  results  of  modern  hberties,  is  willing  at  times, 
to  restrain  the  impatience  of  those  who  would  openly  resort 
to  violence  to  do  away  with  the  Church. 

Second  effect:  There  is  but  one  step  from  perversion  of 
mind  and  contempt  of  rehgion  to  perversion  of  heart.     Why 


CERTAIN    PREROGATIVES    OF   THE    CHURCH.  439 

should  not  one  who  has  ceased  to  love  God,  to  fear  His 
justice,  and  who  has  no  hope  of  eternal  happiness,  abandon 
himself  to  the  violence  of  his  passions?  Man  thirsts  for 
happiness ;  if  he  no  longer  seeks  it  where  it  is  to  be  found,  in 
noble  submission  to  God,  in  peace  of  conscience,  and  the 
firm  hope  of  eternal  reward,  he  is  forced  to  seek  it  here  below 
in  the  satisfaction  of  his  passions,  even  of  the  most  brutal. 
This  is  so  constantly  verified  by  experience  that  we  do  not 
need  to  insist  upon  it. 

Third  effect:  The  perils  which  threaten  modem  society. 
When  freed  from  the  salutary  restraint  of  religion  why 
will  not  the  poor  look  with  envy  upon  the  possessions  of 
the  rich,  and  why,  when  they  find  themselves  the  stronger, 
will  they  not  take  forcible  possession  of  that  which  they 
covet?  ''Need  we  be  astonished,"  says  Leo  XIIL,  ''that 
men  of  inferior  conditions  try  to  raise  palaces  and  emulate 
the  fortimes  of  the  rich?  Is  it  astonishing  that  there  is  no 
longer  any  peace  in  public  or  private  hfe,  and  that  the  human 
race  has  almost  reached  the  extremes  of  hfe?"  Behold  to 
what  the  doctrine  of  liberalism  inevitably  leads.  No  doubt 
many  who  profess  and  advocate  it  do  not  see  its  disastrous 
consequences,  but  their  short-sightedness  does  not  destroy 
the  incontrovertible  logic  of  facts;  sooner  or  later  the  doc- 
trine will  bear  its  natural  fruit,  anarchy  and  revolution.^ 

Objection. — There  is  a  specious  objection  which  it  is 
important  to  answer.  God,  the  supreme  Legislator,  it  is 
argued,  granted  liberty  to  man,  therefore  civil  society  or 
power  may  do  hkewise. 

^  "If  we  take  away  belief  in  the  next  world,  the  man  of  the  people 
must  necessarily  and  lawfully  claim  equality  in  this,  and  he  will 
claim  it  with  forcible  logic,  with  gnashing  of  teeth,  and  rage  in  his 
heart,  and  firearms  in  hand.  'My  soul,'  he  exclaims,  'is  only  a 
growth,  and  God  is  only  an  hjrpothesis.  You  take  from  me  the 
restraining  fear  of  hell,  you  rob  me  of  the  blessed  hope  of  paradise; 
then,  fear  and  hope  taken  from  me,  all  that  remains  are  the  tem- 
poral possessions  of  this  world.  We  desire  them  and  we  will  have 
them.'  "     (Mgr.  Mermillod.) 


440  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

Reply. — 1st.  To  solve  this  difficulty  it  suffices  to  make  the 
essential  distinction  between  physical  liberty,  or  simple  power, 
and  moral  liberty,  or  right.  God,  you  say,  gave  man  hberty. 
True;  but  which  kind  of  hberty?  He  gave  him  physical 
liberty,  that  is,  the  possibility  of  choosing  between  good  and 
evil,  but,  so  far  from  permitting  him  to  use  his  liberty  to  do 
evil.  He  imposed  on  him  the  moral  obhgation  to  make  use 
of  it  to  attain  his  last  end  by  doing  good.  So  true  is  this  that 
He  threatens  with  hell  those  who  choose  to  do  evil  and 
reserves  to  Himself  the  right  to  punish  them  eternally. 
Society  cannot,  even  if  it  would,  rob  man  of  this  physical 
Hberty;  but  it  does  not  imitate  the  action  of  God  if  it  grant 
man  the  right  to  do  evil  with  impunity. 

2d.  Moreover,  to  set  one's  actions  by  those  of  another,  one 
must  be  in  an  analogous  position.  Now,  in  regard  to  liberty 
there  are  several  important  differences  between  the  divine 
and  the  human  government. 

a.  "God  is  Judge,"  says  St.  Thomas,  "because  He  is 
Creator,"  and  in  Him  the  judicial  and  the  creative  act  reach 
beyond  the  insignificant  duration  of  time.  When  one's 
field  of  action  is  eternity,  why  hasten  the  course  of  justice? 
Are  these  the  conditions  of  human  government? 

6.  While  waiting  the  supreme  and  inevitable  reparation, 
God  has  placed  side  by  side  with  liberty  in  this  life  all  the 
correctives,  conmiandments,  exhortations,  promises,  threats, 
interior  grace,  etc.,  necessary  to  "protect  it  in  its  power  for 
good  and  thwart  it  in  its  power  for  evil.  Moreover,  He  has 
created  domestic  society  and  civil  society  and  invested  them 
with  punitive  power.  He  commands  parents  even  to  chastise 
their  children  and  not  to  spare  the  rod  (Prov.  xiii.  and  xxii.) ; 
and  St.  Paul  reminds  rulers  that  they  bear  not  the  sword 
in  vain,  that  they  are  God's  ministers,  avengers  to  execute 
wrath  upon  him  that  doth  evil  (Rom.  xiii.).  Is  it  in  this 
sense  that  human  government  seeks  to  imitate  God's  govern- 
ment? 

Remark. — It  is  clearly  evident  from  what  has  been  said 


CERTAIN   PREROGATIVES   OF  THE   CHURCH.  441 

above  that  neither  the  Church  nor  the  State  can  be  taxed  with 
intolerance  and  tyranny  when  they  seek,  as  they  did  in  the 
Middle  Ages,  to  regulate  the  exercise  of  the  human  will,  and 
to  diminish  for  men  the  facihties  for  evil  and  thus  prevent 
them  from  risking  their  happiness  and  welfare.  Such 
restrictions,  so  far  from  being  an  act  of  violence,  are,  on  the 
contrary,  a  great  benefit  to  society,  f acihtating  for  its  members 
the  accompUshment  of  duty  and  rendering  neglect  or  viola- 
tion of  duty  more  difficult.  Now  such  are  the  benefits  which 
result  from  the  intimate  union  of  Church  and  State  when 
circumstances  render  it  possible.  By  protecting  the  Church 
of  Christ  and  prohibiting  opposing  creeds  the  State  does  not 
violate  man's  hberty,  but  comes  to  the  aid  of  his  weakness  by 
shielding  him  from  error.  It  would  clearly  be  absurd  to 
maintain  that  it  was  violating  the  rights  of  the  human 
intelfigence  to  teach  and  enhghten  it  that  it  may  be  able  to 
distinguish  truth  from  falsehood;  why  should  it  be  less 
absurd  to  claim  that  it  was  tyrannical — that  it  was  doing 
violence  to  man's  will  to  remove  from  about  him  incentives 
to  evil  and  help  him  to  attain  the  good  for  which  he  was 
created?  It  might  just  as  well  be  said  that  the  parapet  wall 
which  guards  a  bridge  is  an  attempt  to  interfere  with  the 
free  circulation  of  the  crowd,  or  that  the  father  of  a  family 
violates  the  rights  of  his  children  when  he  will  not  suffer 
immoral  or  impious  doctrines  to  infect  their  frank,  innocent 
souls  and  forbids  them  all  that  is  of  a  nature  to  corrupt  them. 
Moreover,  as  we  have  already  said,  the  right  to  be  impious, 
blasphemous,  or  vicious  does  not,  cannot  exist  for  man,  and 
the  State  violates  no  right  when  it  prevents  its  subjects  from 
destroying  befiefs  necessary  for  their  eternal  happiness,  or 
from  weakening  all  that  serves  as  the  basis  of  civil  as  well  as 
religious  society. 

It  is  remarkable  how  readily  these  sophists  admit  on  the 
one  hand  that  it  is  not  violating  human  liberty  to  forbid 
and  punish  certain  crimes,  such  as  assassination,  theft,  in- 
cendiarism, which  militate  against  the  temporal  welfare  of 


442  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

subjects,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  denounce  as  tyranny  all 
attempt  to  remove  causes  productive  of  evils  still  more 
serious,  since  they  compromise  the  eternal  welfare  of  these 
same  subjects. 

III.  Tolerance. 

We  cannot  transcribe  here  the  luminous  pages  in  which 
Leo  XIII.  indicates  the  remedy  for  this  evil  of  liberalism. 
But  guided  by  his  teaching,  we  would  explain  why  the 
Church,  ''while  condemning  in  principle  these  false  and  in- 
jurious hberties,  recognizes  that  there  are  circumstances  when 
they  may  be  hcitly  tolerated.''  Toleration  always  supposes 
something  evil  which  is  endured  and  permitted  for  grave 
reasons.^ 

A.  Let  us  hear,  first  of  all,  what  the  sovereign  Pontiff  says 
on  this  subject:  ''The  Church,  in  her  motherly  appreciation, 
takes  into  consideration  the  weight  of  human  infirmity, 
and  she  is  aware  of  the  movement  by  which  minds  and 
affairs  are  swayed  at  the  present  time.  For  these  motives, 
while  granting  rights  only  to  what  is  true  and  just,  she  is  not 
opposed  to  the  tolerance  which  public  powers  think  necessary 
to  use  in  regard  to  certain  things  contrary  to  truth  and  justice, 
in  view  of  avoiding  greater  evil  or  of  attaining  or  preserving 
a  greater  good." 

We  see,  therefore,  that  there  is  an  important  distinction  to 
be  made  in  regard  to  modern  liberties.  These  hberties,  which 
consist  in  conceding  to  every  man  a  natural  right  to  profess 

*  Balmes,  European  Civilization,  ch.  34,  35,  67;  Letters  to  a  Scep- 
tic, 1.  7;  Hergenrother,  Church  and  State,  II.,  Essays  16,  17;  Rev. 
W.  C.  Robinson,  Liberty  of  Conscience;  Spalding,  J.  M.,  MiscelL, 
Introd.  I.;  Gibbons,  Faith  of  Our  Fathers,  ch.  18;  Bishop  England's 
Works,  vol.  ii.,  1.  10  to  Wm.  Hawley;  Br.  W.  vii.  320,  479,  x.,  xi., 
xii.,  xiii.;  A.  C.  Q.  XV.  301,  xix.  508;  C.  W.  iv.,  v.,  xxiii.  243,  xU. 
363  (freedom  of  worship) ;  D.  R.  Old  Ser.  ix.  396,  xxxix.  462,  New 
Ser.  viii.  347,  xxvii.  215.  On  Mary  Tudor  see  D.  R.  New  Ser.  xxv. 
435,  xxii.  363,  xxiii.  324,  xxiv.  110. 


CERTAIN    PREROGATIVES    OF   THE    CHURCH.  443 

any  religion  he  chooses,  to  propagate  through  the  press  error 
and  evil  as  much  as  truth  and  righteousness,  are  evil  and  of 
themselves  condenmable:  this  is  what  is  ordinarily  called 
the  thesis  (theory).  Nevertheless  there  are  circumstances  of 
time  or  place  when  these  liberties  may  be  conscientiously 
tolerated,  sustained,  defended,  in  order  to  avoid  greater  evils : 
this  is  what  we  call  the  hypothesis  (practice).^ 

B.  Let  us  give  now  a  few  proofs  to  establish  the  lawfulness 
of  this  tolerance  under  certain  circumstances. 

1st.  The  interest  of  the  Church  itself  and  of  its  divine  mission 
may  require  this  tolerance.  It  is  an  undisputed  principle 
that  of  two  evils  we  must  choose  the  lesser,  and  that  one 
evil  may  be  lawfully  tolerated  in  order  to  avoid  a  greater. 
Now,  in  a  given  country  and  at  a  given  time  (when,  for 
example,  these  modern  liberties  already  incorporated  in  the 
constitution  and  laws  of  the  country  have  passed  into  fact 
and  practice),  the  interest  of  truth  and  religion  may  re- 
quire that  this  state  of  affairs  be  allowed  to  remain,  at  least 
for  a  time,  in  order  to  avoid  a  greater  evil  or  not  to  render 

^  This  distinction  between  thesis  and  hypothesis  is  to  be  found  in 
a  host  of  questions  in  every-day  life,  and  common  sense  enforces  it 
frequently,  though  we  are  not  always  aware  of  it.  Hypothesis  is  the 
application  of  the  principles  of  the  thesis  according  to  the  circum- 
stances of  the  case;  thus  to  correct  a  child  who  does  wrong  is  a 
father's  duty — this  is  the  thesis;  to  correct  him  at  a  certain  time  and 
in  a  certain  way  might  be  imprudent — this  is  the  hypothesis.  Food  is 
necessary  to  animal  life — this  is  the  thesis;  but  it  maybe  poison  for 
a  sick  man — this  is  the  hypothesis.  It  is  the  same  with  religious 
truth.  It  possesses  of  itself  imprescriptible  and  exclusive  rights; 
but  there  may  be  circumstances  when  it  is  not  well  rigidly  to  enforce 
these  rights,  and  when  error  or  evil  may  be  tolerated.  It  is  in  this 
sense  that  Leo  XIII. ,  after  declaring  that  neither  society  nor  indi- 
viduals are  permitted  to  treat  all  religions  alike  (the  thesis),  adds 
farther  on:  "If  the  Church  judges  that  it  is  not  permitted  to  place 
the  various  worships  on  the  same  legal  footing  as  the  true  religion, 
she  does  not  for  this  reason  condemn  the  heads  of  government  who, 
in  view  of  some  good  to  be  obtained  or  of  some  evil  to  be  avoided, 
tolerate  these  various  worships,  permitting  them  to  have  their  place 
in  the  State"  (the  hypothesis). 


444  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

all  good  impossible.  To  attempt  in  such  a  conjunction 
of  circumstances  to  abolish  these  liberties  already  estabhshed 
would  not  serve  the  interest  of  the  Church,  but  would  excite 
against  her  hatred  and  reprisals  by  exposing  the  State  to 
deplorable  trouble  and  discord. 

2d.  This,  moreover,  is  the  teaching  of  theology.  Interpreted 
by  St.  Thomas,  it  declares  it  lawful  in  certain  cases  to  tolerate 
even  pagan  worship.  With  how  much  greater  reason  may 
the  tolerance  of  modern  liberties  be  justified,  since  their 
most  extreme  abuses  never,  like  paganism,  go  so  far  as  to 
deify  creatures  and  vices! 

3d.  The  conduct  of  the  Church  proves  the  lawfulness  of 
this  tolerance.  If  modern  liberties  could  never  be  tolerated, 
she  would  have  had  to  oblige  Constantine  on  the  very  day 
of  his  conversion  to  banish  absolutely  the  worship  of  false 
gods  from  his  kingdom.  In  the  case  of  the  return  of  a 
Protestant  prince  to  the  faith,  she  would  have  to  require  of 
him  the  immediate  abohtion  of  the  liberty  hitherto  allowed 
his  subjects  to  profess  the  Protestant  rehgion.  Now  the 
Church  has  never  acted  in  this  way,  and  it  is  not  in  this  sense 
that  Gregory  XVI.  (Encycl.  Mirari  vos,  1832)  and  Pius  IX. 
(Encycl.  Quanta  Cura,  1864)  condemned  these  liberties. 

We  find  in  the  Roman  review  La  Civilta  Cattolica  the  fol- 
lowing written  in  1868,  which  seems  to  be  a  summary  of  the 
doctrine  we  have  just  been  stating: 

'^With  the  exception  of  a  very  small  number  all  sincere 
Catholics  agree  in  believing  that  hberty  of  worship  is  an 
absurd  principle.  To  place  truth  in  the  same  rank  with  error 
— is  it  not  as  monstrous  from  a  social  as  from  an  individual 
point  of  view?  Cathohcs  profess,  therefore,  that  such  a  prin- 
ciple appHed  to  the  political  order  must  in  its  very  nature 
be  injurious.  At  the  same  time  they  admit  that  in  certain 
cases  e^dl  must  be  tolerated  because  there  are  circumstances 
when,  in  consequence  of  the  lack  of  good  dispositions  in  a 
subject,  unity  of  rehgion  cannot  be  imposed  ^vithout  resort- 
ing to  violence,  which  CathoHc  principles  condemn.    The 


CERTAIN    PREROGATIVES    OF   THE    CHURCH.  445 

regimen  suited  to  one  in  health  would  be  fatal  to  a  sick  man, 
yet  no  one  would  be  so  foolish  as  to  insist  that  the  regimen 
for  the  sick  man  is  the  ideal  of  hygiene,  and  that  all  must 
submit  to  it.  Without  the  principle  of  hberty  of  worsliip 
properly  understood,  it  is  impossible  to  govern  a  people  where 
unity  of  religion  no  longer  exists,  and  which  is  socially  divided 
by  various  beliefs.  But  to  represent  this  state  of  things 
as  a  state  of  social  perfection,  to  claim  that  it  must  be  in- 
troduced where  its  introduction  is  not  commanded  by  posi- 
tive necessity,  would  be  as  absurd  as  to  say  that  medicine  is 
the  true  food  of  man,  or  that  there  is  no  better  means  of 
preserving  the  purity  of  morals  in  a  household  than  to  throw 
the  doors  open  to  all  kinds  of  corrupt  and  evil  men." 

Corollaries. — The  preceding  principles  solve  several 
apparent  difficulties. 

1st.  They  make  us  understand  how  one  can  be  at  the  same 
time  an  excellent  Christian  and  an  excellent  citizen  in  a  country 
where  modem  liberties  are  proclaimed  by  the  constitution. 

2d.  They  explain,  also,  the  different  action  of  the  Church 
in  different  countries  in  regard  to  the  liberty  accorded  to 
dissenters.  In  a  State  where  the  Church  enjoys  all  her 
rights  she  would  injure  the  success  of  her  divine  mission  if 
she  were  to  yield  a  place  to  error  or  to  evil.  Hence  she 
cannot,  without  failing  in  her  duty,  permit  such  an  innova- 
tion. On  the  contrary,  in  a  country  where  the  true  religion 
is  oppressed,  where  liberty  hardly  exists  at  all  except  for 
those  who  attack  and  hinder  religion,  we  can  understand 
that  the  Church  accepts  civil  tolerance,  that  is,  the  introduc- 
tion of  a  new  state  of  things  enabling  her  to  recover  at 
least  a  portion  of  her  rights. 

3d.  They  make  us  understand,  finally,  why,  under  the  rule 
of  a  constitution  securing  liberty  of  worship  to  all,  the  Church 
may  and  should  stoutly  claim  her  share  of  the  liberty  due  her 
in  virtue  of  this  constitution.  It  would  be  ridiculous  to  say 
that  in  acting  thus  she  abandons  her  own  principles,  or  that 
she  abdicates  her  rights;   she  simply  acts  like  a  proprietor 


446  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

who,  deprived  of  his  possessions  by  the  triumph  of  com- 
munism, afterwards  claims,  in  virtue  of  the  very  principles 
of  communism,  his  proper  share  of  the  common  hoard. 
In  acting  thus  the  proprietor  does  not  deny  his  own  principles 
or  abdicate  his  rights  as  a  proprietor,  but  he  endeavors,  by 
resorting  to  an  argument  ad  hominem,  to  recover  at  least 
a  portion  of  the  possessions  of  which  he  has  been  imjustly 
deprived. 

Summary  and  Conclusions. — A.  From  all  that  precedes 
we  must  conclude  that  in  the  relations  between  Church  and 
State  four  different  conditions  may  exist. 

1st.  An  intimate  union  or  alhance;  the  State  recognizing 
only  the  true  religion,  exclusively  protecting  it  and  banish- 
ing all  other  worships. 

2d.  Civil  tolerance,  properly  so  called;  the  Catholic 
religion  remaining  the  religion  of  the  State,  and  as  such 
protected;  but  at  the  same  time  the  civil  power  tolerating, 
more  or  less,  the  pubhc  exercise  of  one  or  several  dissenting 
worships.     Such  was  the  French  Charter  under  Louis  XVIII. 

3d.  Absolute  tolerance  or  practical  indifference;  this  is 
what  is  to-day  called  liberty  of  worship.  It  consists  in  the 
State  placing  itself  outside  of  all  religions,  and  recognizing 
none  as  its  own,  or  as  being  entitled  to  its  protection.  This 
separation  may  be  more  or  less  marked ;  thus  in  France  the 
Charter  of  1830  made  all  recognized  religions  equal  before 
the  law.  In  America  the  separation  is  almost  absolute; 
in  Belgium  the  separation  was  less  complete,  particularly 
immediately  after  1830. 

4th.  Dogmatic  tolerance  or  theoretic  indifference.  Here 
also  the  State  is  indifferent  to  all  worships,  but  on  the  ground 
that  it  believes  and  professes  that  man  has  a  natural  right 
to  practise  whatever  religion  he  pleases  or  to  practise  none 
at  all,  or  that  one  can  be  saved  in  all  reUgions  or  ^\dthout  any 
religion ;  that  it  is  a  matter  of  indifference  whether  we  adore 
Jesus  Christ  or  blaspheme  Him. 

From  these  four  possible  situations  we  have  proved  that 


CERTAIN    PREROGATIVES   OF  THE    CHURCH.  447 

an  intimate  alliance  ought  to  exist  between  Church  and 
State  when  societies  are  in  their  normal  and  perfect  state. 
As  to  dogmatic  tolerance,  as  it  is  essentially  evil,  flowing 
from  principles  as  false  as  they  are  subversive  of  good,  it  can 
never  be  permitted.  Hence  it  is  formally  condemned  by  the 
Church.  But  as  governments  are  not  always  so  happily 
constituted  that  the  two  powers  lend  each  other  mutual  aid, 
and  as,  in  the  troubled  times  in  which  we  Hve,  this  much- 
to-be-desired  agreement  has  become  impossible,  recourse 
must  necessarily  be  had  to  civil  tolerance,  properly  so  called, 
and  even  to  absolute  tolerance. 

B.  Two  things,  however,  are  to  be  observed  in  the  exercise 
of  this  tolerance : 

1st.  Though  civil  tolerance,  and  even  practical  indiffer- 
ence, may  be  licit  under  the  circumstances  indicated,  the 
things  thus  tolerated  by  modern  constitutions  do  not  cease 
to  be  in  themselves  reprehensible  before  God  and  in  the 
consciences  of  individuals.  If,  in  virtue  of  the  liberty  of  the 
press,  the  ci\dl  power  permits  the  utterance  of  the  most 
terrible  blasphemies,  these  outrages  upon  the  Divinity  are 
no  less,  from  the  point  of  view  of  conscience,  horrible  crimes. 
It  is  the  same  with  all  acts  intrinsically  evil  which  civil 
legislatures  tolerate  for  grave  reasons.  Those  who  perpetrate 
them  will  be  no  less  condemned  by  the  divine  Legislator, 
who  will  punish  them  in  His  own  time. 

2d.  The  Church  cannot  admit  as  a  general  and  absolute 
thesis  that  the  liberty  granted  to  heterodox  worships,  to 
the  propagation  of  error  and  of  evil,  is  what  is  best  and  most 
conformable  to  the  nature  of  man  and  to  true  civilization. 
She  cannot  find  good  or  right  in  itself  the  freedom  awarded 
to  that  which  ruins  souls,  or  hail  it  as  a  manifestation  of  a 
society's  progress.  Thus  Pius  IX.  has  condemned  the 
following  proposition:  ''The  best  condition  of  all  political 
society  requires  in  our  time  that  the  State  be  constituted 
and  governed  regardless  of  religion,  as  if  it  did  not  exist, 
or  without  recognizing  any  difference  between  the  true  and 


448  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

the  false  religion."  (Encycl.  Quanta  Cura  and  Syllabus 
Prop.  77,  78,  79,  80.) 

C.  It  is  easy  now  to  indicate  what  should  be  the  conduct  of 
the  faithful  children  of  the  Church  in  regard  to  constitutions 
which  admit  modern  liberties. 

a.  When  there  is  question  of  elaborating  a  constitution, 
the  legislators  must,  after  considering  before  God  the  situa- 
tion, the  strength  and  the  weakness  of  the  society  which  they 
represent,  endeavor  to  realize  the  type  of  a  Christian  consti- 
tution, and  approximate  as  closely  as  possible  to  the  ideal. 
When  they  act  under  pressure  of  real  necessity,  they  are  not 
censurable  for  tolerating  an  evil  which  they  cannot  prevent 
without  exciting  disastrous  and  deplorable  calamities,  as 
fatal  to  the  Church  as  to  the  State. 

6.  If  the  constitution  already  exists,  and  if  it  is  not  con- 
formable to  the  principles  of  the  Church,  true  Catholics 
obey  it  in  everything  which  is  not  contrary  to  the  laws  of 
God  and  of  the  Church ;  they  will  never  attempt  to  overthrow 
the  social  edifice  by  violence,  for  this  they  know  God 
forbids. 

c.  If  this  constitution  is  the  result  of  a  transaction  re- 
quired by  circumstances,  they  will  be  loyal  to  their  oath  of 
allegiance,  and  if  they  are  in  power,  they  will  not  persecute 
those  in  favor  of  whom  they  are  pledged  to  exercise  tolerance. 

d.  They  wall  beware,  however,  of  saying  that  such  a  con- 
stitution is,  absolutely  speaking,  the  best.  Above  all,  they 
will  not  claim  that  this  civil  tolerance  is  the  result  of  a  sacred 
and  imprescriptible  natural  right  for  those  who  enjoy  it. 
On  the  contrary,  they  will  frankly  proclaim  true  principles, 
the  exclusive  rights  of  truth,  of  the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ. 
While  admitting  the  necessities  of  the  time  and  of  the  country, 
they  will  deplore  these  necessities,  the  imperfect  state  of 
present  society,  the  blindness  of  minds.  They  will  neglect 
no  peaceable  means  of  bringing  about  a  better  state  of  affairs, 
using  every  lawful  means  authorized  by  the  constitution  itself. 
In  spreading  about  them,  by  speech  and  writing,  the  whole 


CERTAIN    PREROGATIVES    OF   THE    CHURCH.  449 

truth,  they  will  endeavor  to  render  more  and  more  possible, 
by  the  turning  of  minds  to  true  principles,  the  complete 
observance  of  the  laws  of  Christian  society — a  pledge  of 
prosperity  for  the  State  as  well  as  for  the  Church. 

IV.  Notions  concerning  Liberty.^ 

There  are  few  questions  concerning  which  thoughtlessness 
or  bad  faith  has  called  forth  more  errors  and  dangerous 
sophisms  than  hberty.  How  many  confound  lawful  and  real 
Hberty  with  a  chimerical  and  even  criminal  independence!^ 
How  many  see  in  the  mere  physical  power  we  possess  of 
doing  evil  a  justification,  or  rather  a  right,  to  do  evil!  If 
man  really  had  by  nature  the  right  to  teach,  to  write,  to  do 
whatsoever  he  would  or  could,  it  is  evident  that  modern 
Uberties  would  be  most  legitimate  in  themselves  and  as  an 
absolute  thesis. 

''If,"  says  Leo  XIII.,  "in  the  discussions  current  concerning 
Hberty,  is  meant  that  lawful  and  just  hberty  such  as  reason 

^  Balmes,  ch.  67;  Lilly,  chapters  on  European  History,  vol.  i.; 
Gibbons,  Faith,  etc.,  ch.  17;  Spalding,  J.  M.,  Miscell.,  Essay  7;  Br. 
W.  vii.  479,  534,  xx.,  xiii.,  xiv.;  A.  C.  Q.  vi.  517;  C.  W.  x.  721, 
XXXV.  639;  M.  liv.  15,  Ixiii  457;  D.  R.  III.  Ser.  xi.  62. 

^  Independence  means  that  a  being  is  indebted  to  no  one,  and, 
consequently,  has  received  nothing  from  another  and  has  nothing  to  re- 
ceive from  any  one  whomsoever.  This  absolute  independence  belongs 
and  can  belong  only  to  God,  because  He  alone  possesses  in  Himself 
the  reason  of  His  existence  and  of  all  His  perfections,  and  He  Him- 
self is  His  own  end  and  the  source  of  His  infinite  happiness.  Man, 
on  the  contrary,  possesses  only  a  being  which  has  been  lent  him: 
he  holds  from  God  his  existence,  his  faculties,  and  all  that  serves  to 
develop  and  exercise  them.  And  this  gift  is  bestowed  by  God  upon 
man  every  moment  of  his  existence,  for  conservation,  like  creation,  is 
an  uninterrupted  act:  if  God  were  to  cease  for  a  moment  to  uphold 
man,  he  would  fall  back  at  once  into  the  abyss  of  his  nothingness. 
It  follows,  then,  that  man  is  completely  and  every  moment  dependent 
upon  his  Creator;  he  is  dependent  by  essence,  for  he  is  essentially  or  by 
essence  a  created  being.  He  is  even  more  so,  if  possible,  in  the  order 
of  grace  and  glory,  to  which  the  divine  Goodness  has  raised  him. 


450  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

and  our  word  has  just  described,  no  one  would  dare  to  pursue 
the  Church  with  the  sovereignly  unjust  accusation  that  she 
is  the  enemy  of  hberty  of  governments.  .  .  .  The  Church  has 
always  deserved  well  of  this  excellent  gift  of  our  nature,  and 
she  will  not  cease  to  deserve  well  of  it.  .  .  .  And  yet  there  are 
many  who  believe  that  the  Church  is  the  enemy  of  human 
liberty.  This  arises  from  the  defective  and,  as  it  were, 
contrary  ideas  which  they  form  of  liberty.  This  defective 
and  exaggerated  idea  of  liberty  causes  it  to  be  applied  to 
many  things  in  which  man,  according  to  the  judgment  of 
sound  reason,  cannot  be  free." 

It  is  then  of  extreme  importance,  when  speaking  of  liberty, 
to  make  distinctions. 

Liberty,  in  general,  brings  to  our  minds  the  idea  of  freedom 
from  any  restraint  whatever.  But  as  these  restraints  may 
be  of  a  different  nature,  so  there  are  different  kinds  of  Hberty. 
Physical  or  psychological  hberty  differs  from  moral  hberty; 
political  Hberty  must  not  be  confounded  with  civil  or  social 
Hberty;  and  when  they  speak  of  modern  Hberties  stiU  another 
meaning  is  given  to  Hberty. 

1.  Natural  or  physical  liberty ^  which  is  also  caUed  Hberty  of 
indifference,  liberty  of  choice  or  election,  free-will,  consists 
in  that  disposition  of  our  nature  in  virtue  of  which  our  will, 
uniting  all  the  conditions  necessary  to  action,  preserves  the 
faculty  or  power  (physical  power)  to  act  or  not  to  act,  to 
determine  in  favor  of  one  thing  rather  than  another. 

Liberty  consists  essentially  in  the  power  of  determining 
one's  own  action  by  and  through  oneself;  it  does  not  consist 
at  all  in  the  power  of  choosing  evil.  In  fact  God  is  infinitely 
free,  yet  He  cannot  will  evil;  freely  He  chooses  from  among 
the  different  forms  and  degrees  of  goodness  the  one  He  wishes 
to  realize  in  the  created  order.  The  saints  in  heaven  also  are 
free;  yet  sin  has  become  impossible  with  them;  enHghtened 
by  the  full  light  of  truth  and  possessing  the  infinite  good, 
how  can  they  have  the  sHghtest  thought  or  least  velleity 
of  renouncing  this  perfect  happiness.     The   possibiHty  of 


CERTAIN    PREROGATIVES    OF   THE    CHURCH.  451 

violating  the  moral  law,  so  far  from  being  a  perfection  of  our 
nature,  cannot  even  be  called  strength  or  power.  This  is  very 
evident:  no  one  certainly  would  think  of  saying,  "I  have  the 
power  to  be  ill."  We  say,  ''Unfortunately  I  cannot  always 
keep  well."  In  regard  to  the  intelligence,  no  one  would 
consider  it  a  mark  of  strength  to  be  able  to  reason  ill,  to 
draw  false  conclusions  from  true  principles.  This  is  evidently 
a  sign  of  weakness,  an  imperfection  of  the  faculty.  Then  let 
us  be  consistent  and  apply  the  same  reasoning  to  liberty  in 
man ;  let  us  say  that  being  able  to  choose  evil,  that  is,  to  turn 
from  our  final  end,  which  is  happiness,  is  not  a  mark  of  power, 
but,  on  the  contrary,  a  weakness  with  which  the  faculty  of 
the  will  is  afflicted  as  long  as  we  are  in  this  period  of 
probation. 

Is  man  endowed  with  liberty?  Of  this  there  is  no  possible 
doubt.  The  existence  of  free-will  in  man  is  an  undeniable 
fact  attested  by  the  analysis  of  our  free  act,  by  the  innermost 
sense  of  the  individual,  and  the  affirmation  of  all  mankind. 
On  the  other  hand,  to  deny  man's  free-will  would  be  to  destroy 
the  foimdation  of  all  morality  and  of  society  itself. 

We  are  so  free  that,  though  human  violence  may  restrain 
our  exterior  actions,  it  has  no  power  over  the  act  of  our  will. 
''My  body  is  in  your  hands,"  the  martyr  said  to  his  perse- 
cutors, "  but  you  have  no  power  over  my  soul."  The  Church 
has  always  defended  this  liberty  against  all  opinions  to  the 
contrary.  Liberty  is  a  blessing;  Leo  XIII.  calls  it  praestan- 
tissimum  donum,  most  excellent  blesfeing  of  our  nature;  it 
is  in  fact  in  virtue  of  our  free-will  that  we  are  responsible 
for  our  acts  and  that  we  can  merit  heaven.  While  animals 
obey  only  the  senses,  and  are  impelled  only  by  natural 
instinct  to  seek  that  which  is  useful  and  to  avoid  that  which 
is  injurious  to  them,  man,  enlightened  by  intelligence,  resists 
when  he  pleases  the  unreflecting  inclinations  of  his  passions: 
this  is  the  seal  of  his  greatness. 

We  meet,  however,  philosophers  called  fatalists,  determin- 
ists  (fatalism,  determinism,   is  the  natural  consequence  of 


452  CHRISTIAN    APOLOGETICS. 

materialism)  who  have  ventured  to  deny  the  existence  of 
free-will.  But  this  denial  exists,  and  can  exist,  only  in  their 
books;  refuted  by  all  mankind,  it  is  still  more  strongly 
denied  by  the  actions  and  by  the  words  of  these  same  philos- 
ophers. Every  tongue  which  utters  the  words  virtue  and 
vice,  merit  and  demerit,  praise  and  blame,  reward  and 
punishment,  conscience  and  remorse;  every  order  intimated, 
every  law  promulgated,  every  counsel  asked,  every  repent- 
ance expressed,  every  chastisement  inflicted,  proclaims  hu- 
man liberty,  free-will,  and  shows  what  is  the  intimate  con- 
viction of  the  world  and  of  philosophy.  Do  we  not  treat  in 
an  absolutely  different  manner  the  children  who  have  not 
attained  the  age  of  reason,  the  insane,  and  men  in  the  full 
enjoyment  of  reason?  Is  there  not  a  marked  distinction 
between  the  chains  of  the  galley-slave  and  the  manacles  of 
the  insane?  Whence  is  this  difference,  if  it  is  not  from 
free-will?  It  is  what,  in  our  eyes,  makes  the  first  a  crim- 
inal, while  the  misdeeds  of  the  second  make  him  only  an 
object  of  pity.^ 

2.  Moral  liberty,  when  there  is  question  of  an  act  or  a  series 
of  acts,  consists  in  the  absence  of  any  obhgation  binding  the 
will  to  perform  or  to  omit  these  acts. 

We  are  physically  free ;  this  we  have  seen  and  have  solidly, 
though  briefly,  proved.  But  do  we  enjoy  absolute  moral 
freedom?  In  other  words,  is  our  will  restrained  by  no  moral 
obligation?  Have  we  a  right  to  do  whatever  our  physical 
strength  leaves  us  free  to  accomphsh?  No  man  in  his  senses 
would  dare  to  sustain  this  proposition;  only  an  atheist  can 
and  must  affirm  it. 

It  is  evident  to  every  reasoning  mind  that  we  cannot 
rightfully  or  lawfully,  that  is,  with  the  approval  of  conscience 
or  without  neglecting  a  duty  of  conscience,  do  whatever  our 
natural  power  permits.  A  son,  for  example,  may  be  strong 
enough  to  kill  his  father,  but  no  one  would  venture  to  say 

^  In  defence  of  free-will  see  Ward,  Ph.  of  Theism;  Maher,  S.J., 
Psychology,  ch.  18;  A.  C.  Q.  xxvii.  p.  252;  Rickaby,  S.J.,  Essay  6. 


CERTAIN   PREROGATIVES   OF  THE   CHURCH.  453 

that  he  had  a  right  to  do  it.  Hence  there  is  an  essential 
difference  between  force  and  right.  Might  is  not  right.  If 
this  distinction  did  not  exist,  we  should  have  a  right  to 
acquit  as  innocent  the  basest  parricide ;  the  brigand  who  lies 
in  wait  for  the  traveller,  or  openly  attacks  him,  would  have 
the  right  to  assassinate  his  victim,  as  he  has  the  power  or 
the  strength  to  do  it. 

LiberaUsm  perpetually  confounds  physical  or  natural 
liberty  with  moral  liberty.  Because  of  this  confusion  it 
attributes  to  man  a  natural  right  to  propagate  error  and  evil, 
and  regards  modern  liberties  as  an  absolute  good.  Man  is 
free,  says  liberahsm;  this  liberty  is  a  right  of  his  nature: 
hence  the  State  must  respect  and  cause  it  to  be  respected. 
Man,  we  answer,  is  free  physically,  so  free  that  no  one,  not 
even  the  State,  can  hinder  an  act  of  his  will.  But  is  he  always 
morally  free?  Has  he  a  right  to  abuse  his  freedom  to  do 
evil  and  to  propagate  it?  If  you  affirm  that  he  has,  why 
then,  we  ask,  does  the  State  make  laws,  erect  tribunals  and 
prisons?  Can  one  be  punished  for  the  exercise  of  a  lawful 
right? 

It  is  well  to  remark  also  the  equivocal  interpretation 
which  the  word  power  admits,  for  it  is  the  double  meaning 
of  this  word  which  misleads  many  minds,  and  gives  rise  to 
sophisms  on  the  subject  of  liberty.  I  cannot  morally  or 
lawfully  do  all  that  which  I  have  the  material  or  physical 
power  to  do. 

The  foundation  or  primary  basis  of  moral  law  or  of  the 
obligation  laid  upon  the  human  will  is  the  will  of  God,  the 
Creator,  the  sovereign  Master  of  man  and  his  supreme  law- 
giver. Man's  absolute  independence  of  moral  law  can  be 
affirmed  only  by  an  atheist. 

Hence  it  is  absolutely  false  to  say:  man  is  free,  therefore 
he  is  subject  to  no  authority.  The  contrary  thesis  is  true. 
Man  is  free,  but  he  must  make  a  lawful  use  of  his  liberty. 
Man  is  free,  but  he  must  submit  to  God,  and  to  all  power 
which  comes  from  God.    To  refuse  to  recognize,  absolutely 


454  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

or  partially,  the  necessary  authority  of  God  over  His  creatures 
is  not  only  folly,  a  crime,  but  base  ingratitude.  Man's  glory 
and  happiness,  as  well  as  his  most  imperative  duty,  consist, 
on  the  contrary,  in  recognizing  practically,  in  his  moral, 
private,  and  pubhc  Hfe,  his  complete  dependence  on  the 
supreme  Master  of  all  things,  on  God,  who  is  infinite  Wisdom, 
boundless  Goodness,  the  supreme  Good. 

If  man  is  incomparably  superior  to  the  animals,  it  is  because 
he  is  capable  of  making  a  lawful  use  of  his  hberty — a  use 
conformable  to  the  noble  nature  with  which  God  has  endowed 
him.  An  animal  is  irresistibly  led  to  his  end,  but  it  is  not 
fitting  that  one  whom  God  has  destined  for  boundless  happi- 
ness should  be  forced  against  his  will  to  his  supreme  end. 
It  is  more  glorious  for  God  and  for  man  that  man  merit  this 
happiness  by  making  good  use  of  his  liberty,  by  regulating 
his  conduct  by  the  light  of  reason  and  the  divine  precepts. 

We  see,  therefore,  that  liberty  does  not,  as  it  is  frequently 
supposed,  consist  essentially  in  being  free  to  do  as  one  wills, 
particularly  in  freedom  to  do  evil,  to  act  contrary  to  the 
fight  of  reason  and  faith,  to  turn  from  our  last  end,  and  to 
prepare  our  own  degradation,  our  own  misery.  This  is  an 
abuse  of  liberty,  or  rather  it  is  ficense.  But  the  fiberty 
truly  to  be  prized,  that  which  constitutes  the  nobility  of  our 
being,  is  the  power  with  which  the  will  is  endowed  to  choose 
the  means  capable  of  aiding  us  to  attain  our  final  end;  or, 
what  comes  to  the  same  thing,  the  power  to  do  good.  Montes- 
quieu expresses  this  excellently  well  when  he  says  that 
''fiberty  can  consist  only  in  the  power  to  do  what  we  ought 
to  will. " 

''True  liberty,  that  which  is  desirable  in  the  individual 
order,"  says  Leo  XIII.,  ''is  that  which  frees  man  from  the 
slavery  of  error  and  of  the  passions,  which  are  the  worst  of 
tyrants.'^  "In  human  society  liberty  worthy  of  the  name 
does  not  consist  in  doing  whatever  we  please,  but  in  being 
able,  under  the  protection  of  the  civil  laws,  freely  to  five 
according  to  the  requirements  of  the  eternal  law/'    Un- 


CERTAIN    PREROGATIVES   OF   THE   CHURCH.  455 

fortunately  ''  there  is  a  large  number  of  men  who,  after  the 
example  of  Lucifer — the  author  of  these  criminal  words: 
'I  will  not  serve,' — understand  by  the  word  hberty  only 
that  which  is  pure  and  absurd  license.  Such  are  they  who 
belong  to  that  wide-spread  and  powerful  school  who,  borrow- 
ing their  name  from  the  word  Hberty,  would  be  called 
liberals."     (Encycl.  cit.) 

3.  Political  liberty  is  twofold  in  character,  a.  For  a 
nation  it  consists  in  political  independence  in  regard  to 
other  nations.  Manifestly  the  Church  approves  of  all  such 
lawful  independence,  since  she  lays  it  as  a  duty  upon  her 
children  throughout  the  world  to  give  effectual  proof  of  their 
love  for  their  country,  and,  at  need,  to  lay  down  their  Hves 
to  defend  it  from  its  enemies,  h.  For  each  individual  it 
consists  in  the  right  to  take  part,  in  a  greater  or  less  degree, 
directly  or  indirectly  (by  right  of  election),  in  the  government 
of  his  country.  It  is  evidently  not  the  same  in  an  absolute,  an 
aristocratic,  a  constitutional  monarchy  as  in  a  simple  republic. 

Now,  provided  the  sacred  rights  of  religion  are  properly 
respected,  the  Church  shows  no  preference  for  any  of  these 
various  forms  of  government;  she  accommodates  herself  to 
all,  for  she  can  save  souls  as  easily  in  a  Christian  republic  as 
in  a  Christian  monarchy.  Therefore,  provided  a  legitimate 
government,  whatever  it  may  be,  allows  her  the  free  exercise 
of  her  own  mission,  without  usurping  any  of  her  rights,  the 
Church,  on  her  part,  will  never,  in  any  way  whatever,  in- 
terfere with  the  mission  of  the  State  to  procure  the  temporal 
welfare  of  the  people. 

4.  Civil  or  social  liberty,  which  is  also  called  individual 
liberty,  may  be  defined  as  the  power  of  each  individual  to 
exercise  his  personal  activity,  to  provide  for  his  own  interests 
and  those  of  his  family,  without  hindrance  on  the  part  of  his 
fellow  citizens  or  the  government.  It  includes  liberty  of 
person,  of  action,  of  proprietorship,  of  family,  of  community, 
the  right  to  fulfil  all  duties  of  charity,  to  foimd  associations 
for  a  laudable  purpose,  etc. 


456  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

Political  liberty  is  no  doubt  good  and  desirable,  but  the 
modern  or  liberal  State,  the  tendency  of  which  is  to  attain 
universal  centralism,  to  enslave  and  absorb  the  most  sacred 
rights  of  the  individual,  of  the  family,  of  special  societies, 
would  have  us  beheve  that  liberty  par  excellence  resides  in 
the  exercise  of  electoral  rights.  But  in  reahty  what  does 
it  avail  me  to  enjoy  a  certain  degree  of  pohtical  liberty,  that  is, 
to  have  a  hundredth  or  a  milhonth  part  of  influence  in  the 
constitution  of  pubhc  powers,  if  this  government  which  I 
have  contributed  to  establish  binds  my  personal  hberty  in  a 
thousand  ways  by  innumerable  laws,  and  a  pitiless  bureau- 
cracy capriciously  regulates  my  every  action,  and  imprisons 
my  Hfe  in  an  absolute  slavery  of  details?  The  history  of  the 
present  century,  when  men  talk  imceasingly  of  liberty,  clearly 
shows  that  to  stifle  the  true  Hberty  of  the  citizen,  and 
particularly  that  of  Catholic  consciences,  is  the  dream  of 
all  who  are  striving  to  destroy  Catholicism  in  order  to  estab- 
lish upon  its  ruins  a  purely  natural  society. 

Striking  facts  of  history  prove  how  great  has  ever  been 
the  Church's  sympathy  with  civil  liberty.  Who  but  the 
Church  estabhshed  in  the  world  of  nations  the  only  solid 
foundation  of  true  liberty  and  equality?  Did  she  not,  in  the 
midst  of  the  terrible  corruption  wrought  by  pagan  ideas  and 
morals,  effectually  teach  mankind  that  all  are  brothers  and 
equals  in  the  sight  of  God?  Was  it  not  the  Church  who 
rigidly  imposed  upon  all — upon  those  who  govern,  as  well 
as  upon  those  who  are  governed — the  duty  of  justice  and 
charity?  Was  it  not  the  Church  who,  by  her  doctrines,  her 
laws,  her  institutions,  effected  the  rehabilitation  of  woman, 
of  the  slave,  of  the  child,  of  the  poor,  of  the  laborer — in  a 
word,  of  all  whose  rights  had  been  denied,  nay,  trampled 
under  foot?     (See  below,  Ch.  V.) 


CHAPTER  IV. 
CERTAIN  ACCUSATIONS  AGAINST  THE  CHURCH. 

Holy  in  her  Founder,  ever  pure  in  her  doctrine  and  moral 
teaching,  the  Church  has  never  ceased  to  lead  her  members 
to  the  practice  of  the  most  beautiful  and  even  the  most 
heroic  virtues.  Thus,  despite  human  infirmity  and  the 
violence  of  human  passions,  CathoHcs  have  ever  numbered 
among  them  innumerable  saints,  apostles,  ministers,  men 
of  great  and  noble  character,  incapable  of  baseness,  ready  to 
devote  themselves  to  works  of  the  highest  perfection  and 
the  most  sublime  charity.  But  though  man  may  make  a 
noble  use  of  his  liberty,  and  wage  a  generous  war  against 
his  passions,  nevertheless  he  is  only  too  often  led  to  heed 
their  voice.  The  grace  of  Baptism,  and  even  that  of  Holy 
Orders,  does  not  destroy  the  evil  incHnations  of  the  human 
heart.  In  the  course  of  eighteen  centuries  abuses  could  not 
but  creep  into  the  morals  of  Christian  peoples;  there  could 
not  but  be  found  sins  and  crimes  among  Catholics,  and  even 
among  priests  and  bishops  neglectful  of  their  duties. 

But  what  do  the  enemies  of  Catholicism  do  at  sight  of  these 
inevitable  human  failings?  Instead  of  admiring  the  marvels 
wrought  in  souls  by  the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel,  despite 
the  weakness  of  degenerate  human  nature  and  the  allurements 
of  passion,  they  eagerly  seize  upon  the  abuses  and  faults  to  be 
found  during  this  long  series  of  centuries,  and,  making  them 
the  foundation  of  their  polemics,  never  cease  to  cast  them  in 
the  face  of  the  Church,  as  if  she  were  responsible  for  them. 
The  regeneration  which  she  has  wrought  in  the  world,  her 
persistent  condemnation  of  all  that  is  contrary  to  the  divine 

457 


45S  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

law,  count  as  naught  in  their  eyes;  the  crimes  of  a  few  bap- 
tized reprobates  furnish  the  arsenal  of  these  scandal-mongers. 
Yet,  as  this  arsenal  is  not  well  furnished,  they  find  them- 
selves forced  to  resort  continually  to  the  same  weapons, 
notwithstanding  they  have  become  blunt  and  almost  harm- 
less; they  ignore  the  most  convincing  refutations,  and  at 
every  opportunity  cite  the  Inquisition,  the  condemnation  of 
Galileo,  and  a  small  number  of  similar  charges.  To  guard 
weak  souls  and  defend  the  Church  against  these  puerile 
accusations,  the  apologist  must  show  how  little  foundation 
there  is  for  them.  This  is  what  we  shall  do  in  the  following 
chapter.* 

ART.  I.— INTOLERANCE  OF  THE  CHURCH.^ 

I.  In  What  Sense  the  Catholic  Church  is  Intolerant. 

If  we  understand  the  true  meaning  of  this  word,  that  is,  in 
the  sense  of  dogmatic  or  doctrinal  intolerance,  it  needs  no 
defence,  and  the  Catholic  Church  is  far  from  defending  her- 
self against  this  alleged  reproach.  Dogmatic,  doctrinal,  or 
religious  tolerance  amounts  to  religious  indifference,  which 
refuses  to  acknowledge  any  religion  as  exclusively  true  or 
of  obligation.  Dogmatic  intolerance,  on  the  contrary,  is 
an  essential  prerogative  of  truth,  and  it  is  a  universal  and 
r^cessary  consequence  of  the  very  existence  of  the  Catholic 
religion,  which  alone  is  true  and  binding  upon  all  men. 

To  reproach  the  Church  with  this  intolerance  is  to  reproach 

^  As  to  certain  accusations  prompted  by  ignorance  or  prejudice — 
for  example,  that  we  are  obliged  to  believe  all  the  fancies  it  may 
please  the  Pope  to  publish;  that  we  adore  the  saints,  their  images 
and  relics;  that  our  worship  consists  only  in  exterior  ceremonies; 
that  to  obtain  the  pardon  of  our  sins,  absolution  without  repentance 
is  sufficient;  that  with  money  we  can  buy  the  forgiveness  of  present 
or  future  sins,  and  similar  absurd  charges — a  Catholic  with  ordinary 
religious  instruction  can  readily  refute  them. — Editor. 

*See  references  on  pp.  435,  442;  also  Rickaby,  Oxf.  Conf.,  I.,  and 
C.  T.  S.,  vol.  36;  Milner,  End  of  Contr.,  1.  49. 


CERTAIN   ACCUSATIONS  AGAINST  THE   CHURCH.  459 

her  with  being  and  with  beheving  herself  necessary  truth. 
It  belongs  to  truth  to  exclude  all  that  is  contrary  to  it,  and 
consequently  not  only  is  true  religion  intolerant,  but  so 
also  is  all  science.  There  is  nothing  more  intolerant  than 
mathematics,  for  the  reason  that  it  is  founded  on  invariable 
principles.  The  Church,  by  the  very  fact  that  she  is  certain 
of  possessing  religious  truth  in  its  entirety,  must  inexorably 
condemn  all  error.  Thus  Bossuet  acknowledged  that ''the 
Catholic  rehgion  is  the  most  severe  and  the  least  tolerant  of 
all  religions;"  and  Jules  Simon,  a  contemporary  naturalist 
philosopher,  confesses  that  ''the  lawfulness  of  ecclesiastical 
intolerance  is  beyond  dispute." 

We  readily  acknowledge  that,  in  this  sense,  the  other 
religious  societies  are  not  intolerant.  J.  J.  Rousseau  could 
say  of  Protestantism:  "The  Protestant  rehgion  is  tolerant 
in  principle,  it  is  essentially  tolerant,  it  is  as  tolerant  as  it  is 
possible  to  be,  since  the  only  dogma  it  does  not  tolerate  is 
that  of  intolerance."  But  such  praise  is  the  most  crushing 
refutation  of  a  rehgious  doctrine. 

But  if  the  Cathohc  Church  is  justly  intolerant  of  evil 
doctrines  and  vice,  as  truth  must  necessarily  be,  she  is  full 
of  mercy  for  the  erring  and  for  sinners.  Established  for  the 
salvation  of  men,  she  leaves  nothing  undone  to  wrest  souls 
from  their  eternal  ruin.  Ever  faithful  to  the  command  she 
received  from  God,  she  has  striven  to  convert  the  world  by 
the  preaching  of  the  Gospel,  that  is,  she  has  striven  to  persuade 
souls  and  has  never  resorted  to  violence  or  constraint.  Like 
her  divine  Master,  she  has  at  all  times  suffered  persecutions 
and  shed  her  blood  for  the  salvation  of  men.  If  at  times 
she  has  thought  proper  to  chastise  her  own  rebellious  children, 
it  was  in  virtue  of  a  right  which  no  one  thought  of  disputing, 
and  she  has  always  administered  chastisement  with  a  motherly 
hand,  to  convert  her  children  or  to  remove  scandal  from 
among  them.  Such  has  not  been  the  conduct  of  heretical 
sects,  nor  of  the  other  enemies  of  the  Church. 


460  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 


II.  Protestant  Intolerance.' 

It  is  remarkable  that  the  same  men  who  unjustly  accuse 
the  Church  of  intolerance  usually  award  the  fullest  approba- 
tion to  Protestantism,  as  if  it  represented  the  true  tolerance 
approved  by  sound  reason.  But  if  we  question  history 
written  by  Protestants  themselves,  we  shall  see,  as  the 
Protestant  Menzel  affirms,  that  ''where  Protestantism 
reigned,  intolerance  reigned." 

1.  Luther,  the  first  founder  of  Protestantism,  whom  they 
would  represent  as  the  apostle  of  tolerance  and  the  liberator 
of  thought,  notwithstanding  he  openly  denies  free-will, 
publicly  commanded  his  followers  ''to  gain  heaven  at  the 
point  of  the  sword,  to  ascend  to  God  on  mountains  of  the 
slain. ' '  His  war-cry  was, ' '  Live  the  Bible,  death  to  Papists !  '^ 
"Rush  upon  the  Pope,"  he  tells  his  followers,  "and  kill  him, 
as  well  as  all  about  him,  emperors,  kings,  princes,  and  rulers." 
"  We  must  wash  our  hands  in  their  blood,"  the  bold  innovator 
repeatedly  cried. 

These  frequent  exhortations  to  massacre  met  with  only 
too  ready  response,  and  resulted  in  the  well-known  war  of 
the  peasants  (1525)  enkindled  in  Germany  by  the  apostate 
monk.  As  long  as  their  ravages  and  cruelties  were  exercised 
in  Catholic  countries  the  innovator  approved  of  these  un- 
discipfined   hordes;  but   when   he   found  them,   under  the 

^  Orjanam,  A.  F.,  Protestantism  and  Liberty  (London,  1874); 
Spalding,  M.  J.,  MiscelL,  Introduction  and  essays  10,  11,  12; 
Bp.  England's  Works,  vol.  i.,  1.  17  to  Blanco  White;  Marcy,  ch. 
27  ff.;  Kenrick,  Vindication  of  Catholics,  lect.  19;  Craig,  Christian 
Persecutions;  Martinet,  Solution  of  Great  Problems,  ii.,  ch.  57  to  65; 
Br.  W.  X.;  C.  W.  xvi.  289.  On  the  persecution  of  Catholics  in 
England  and  Ireland  see  works  by  Challoner,  Moran,  Pollen,  Thompson, 
Morris,  Foley,  Madden  (Penal  Laws) ;  in  Acadia,  Shea,  vol.  i.,  p.  421  ff.; 
A.  C.  Q.  ix.  592,  xii.  341;  in  Holland,  D.  R.,  Apr.  1894,  p.  388;  in 
New  England,  Spalding,  M.  J.,  1.  c,  essays  19,  20,  34;  D.  R.  Old  Ser.  i. 
314,  xxxviii.  273;  in  Prussia,  Spalding,  J.  L.,  Essays,  etc.;  Parsons, 
Studies,  VI.,  ch.  1. 


CERTAIN   ACCUSATIONS   AGAINST   THE    CHURCH.  461 

guidance  of  Munzer,  invading  countries  where  the  Reforma- 
tion had  been  estabUshed,  he  immediately  excited  Protestant 
rulers  against  them.  ''To  arms,  princes!"  he  exclaimed. 
''Strike,  slay,  kill  them  openly  and  in  secret,  for  there  is 
nothing  more  diabolical  than  sedition;  it  is  a  dog  which  will 
attack  you  if  you  do  not  destroy  it."  "It  is  not  only  your 
right,"  he  said  again  to  Protestant  princes,  "it  is  also  your 
duty  to  establish  the  pure  Gospel,  to  protect  the  new  churches, 
to  destroy  the  authority  of  the  Pope,  and  to  allow  no  strange 
doctrine  to  be  propagated."  "Admirable  times,"  he  ex- 
claims elsewhere,  "when  princes  can  more  easily  merit 
heaven  by  massacring  the  peasants  and  by  shedding 
blood  than  they  could  formerly  by  pouring  forth  prayers  to 
God.  Every  peasant  slain  is  lost  body  and  soul,  and  belongs 
for  eternity  to  the  devil."  More  than  one  hundred  thousand 
of  these  unfortunate  creatures  perished,  and  Luther  gloried 
in  these  odious  massacres.  "It  was  I,"  he  exclaimed,  "who 
shed  this  blood  by  the  order  of  God." 

Such  was  the  cold-blooded  cruelty  of  this  leader  of  the 
Reformation,  whose  barbarous  exhortations  were  only  too 
faithfully  followed.  The  sacrilegious  robbery  of  churches 
and  monasteries,  armed  revolt,  the  massacre  of  entire  popula- 
tions, the  Thirty  Years'  War  which  covered  the  country  with 
blood  and  ruins,  were  the  high  achievements  which  signaHzed 
Protestantism  in  Germany. 

2.  And  what  was  taking  place  in  Switzerland?  Calvin, 
the  most  infamous  and  the  most  cruel  of  tyrants,  wrote  a 
whole  book  solely  to  prove  that  heretics  ought  to  be  put  to 
death.  Adding  example  to  precept,  he  caused  Michael 
Servetus  to  be  burned  alive  for  the  crime  of  heresy,  James 
Gruet  to  be  beheaded  for  an  attempt  to  subvert  his  church 
ordinances,  and  Valentine  Gentilis  for  deliberate  heresy. 
Antoni,  Punch,  Bolsec,  Castellio,  Ochino,  Alicot,  and  a 
hundred  others  paid  with  their  lives  for  the  unpardonable 
boldness  of  censuring  the  reformer.  To  abstain  from  any 
act  of  the  new  religion,  such  as  preaching  or  coramunicating, 


462  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

constituted  a  crime  of  high  treason,  and  was  punished  ac- 
cordingly. ''Calvin,"  says  Gallifet,  a  Protestant  writer, 
''estabhshed  first  by  craft  and  afterward  by  violence  the 
reign  of  the  most  ferocious  intolerance,  of  the  grossest  super- 
stition, of  the  most  impious  dogmas.  .  .  .  Only  blood  would 
satisfy  this  base  soul."  This  same  man  desired  that  Ana- 
baptists should  be  treated  as  brigands.  "  In  the  legislation 
conceived  of  by  this  monster,"  says  Audin,  "nothing  but 
the  word  death  resounded;  blood  flowed  everywhere.  The 
scaffold  or  the  stake  cut  short  all  resistance." 

Nor  were  the  measures  of  Zwinglius  more  gentle.  Witness 
his  letter  of  May  4,  1525,  to  Ambrose  Blaurer,  quoted  by 
Janssen  in  Ein  zweites  Wort  an  meine  Kritiker,  where  he 
declares  it  lawful  to  massacre  priests,  if  necessary,  in  order 
to  abolish  images  and  the  Mass. 

3.  France  presented  a  like  spectacle.  The  Calvinist  Hu- 
guenots kindled  a  fierce  civil  war;  pillaged  Orleans,  Pithi- 
viers,  Nimes,  Auxerre,  Bourges,  Montpellier,  whole  prov- 
inces ;  massacred  the  inhabitants  and  destroyed  the  churches 
they  encountered  in  their  route,  hanging  or  drowning  the 
priests  and  religious  who  fell  into  their  hands.  At  Orthes 
they  destroyed  the  whole  Catholic  population,  numbering 
three  thousand  souls.  In  the  year  1562  alone  they  put  to 
death,  according  to  their  own  account,  four  thousand  priests 
and  religious,  destroyed  twenty  thousand  churches  and 
ninety  hospitals.  "The  Queen  of  Navarre's  violence  tow- 
ard priests  and  religious,"  says  Bossuet,  ''is  well  known:  the 
towers  whence  Cathohcs  were  cast  and  the  abysses  into  which 
they  were  flung  are  still  shown. ' '  ^ 

4.  Similar  intolerance  prevailed  in  Denmark,  where  Lu- 
theranism  was  introduced  with  Christian  11. ,  surnamed  the 
Nero  of  the  North.  Under  his  successor,  Frederick  II.,  such 
horrors  were  perpetrated  upon  religious  that  even  the  Prot- 
estant historian  Mallet  (Histoire  du  Denmark,   t.  vi.)  says 

^  History  of  the  Variations  of  Protestantism,  vol.  ii.  See  C.  W., 
Apr.  1898.    Cfr.  references  to  art.  7  below. 


CERTAIN  ACCUSATIONS   AGAINST  THE    CHURCH.  463 

that  ^  4n  no  country  where  the  Reformation  was  established 
did  monks  suffer  such  vexations  as  in  Denmark ; "  e very- 
Catholic  priest  and  every  one  who  sheltered  a  priest  were 
under  sentence  of  death.  In  Sweden,  which  became  Lu- 
theran under  Gustavus  Vasa,  the  cruelty  of  this  prince  toward 
Catholics  was  so  horrible  and  the  massacres  so  terrible  that 
they  excited  the  indignation  of  Luther  himself. 

5.  The  history  of  the  schism  in  England,  which  sprang 
from  the  passions  of  a  debauched  prince,  says  that  Henry 
VIII.  condemned  to  the  scaffold  two  queens,  two  cardinals, 
twenty  archbishops  and  bishops,  more  than  five  hundred 
abbots,  priors,  monks,  a  host  of  doctors,  dukes,  counts  and 
other  noblemen,  among  the  latter  the  celebrated  Thomas 
More,  more  than  seventy-two  thousand  CathoHcs  of  all  ranks. 
''I  would  I  could  efface  from  our  annals,"  says  Fitz  Wilham, 
the  Anghcan  author  of  the  ''  Letters  of  Atticus,"  "  all  trace  of 
the  long  series  of  iniquities  which  accompanied  the  Reforma- 
tion in  England.  They  record  injustice  and  oppression, 
rapine,  murder,  and  sacrilege.  Such  were  the  means  by 
which  the  inexorable  and  bloodthirsty  tyrant  Henry  VIIL, 
the  founder  of  our  faith,  estabhshed  the  supremacy  of  his 
new  church.  All  who  wished  to  preserve  the  rehgion  of 
their  fathers  and  continue  to  adhere  to  the  authority  which 
he  himself  had  taught  them  to  revere  were  treated  as  rebels, 
and  soon  became  his  victims."  It  was  principally  under 
the  reign  of  the  virgin  queen,  the  good  Elizabeth,  as  she  was 
called  (1559-1603),  that  the  persecutions  against  CathoHcs 
assumed  the  most  barbarous  character.  This  worthy 
daughter  of  Henry  VIIL  and  Anne  Boleyn  put  to  death  no 
fewer  Catholics  than  her  father;  her  atrocities  startled  the 
world  and  surpassed  those  of  pagan  antiquity.  The  massa- 
cres she  ordered  in  Ireland  were  so  terrible  that,  according 
to  the  Protestant  writer  Leland,  ''httle  more  than  ashes  and 
dead  bodies  remained  for  her  Majesty  Elizabeth  to  govern." 

6.  We  cannot  read  without  a  shudder  the  account  which  the 
Protestant  historian  Kerroux  gives  in  his  Ahregi  de  Vhistoire 


464  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

de  la  Hollande,  t.  ii.,  of  the  cruel  tortures  which  Cathohcs 
endured  in  the  Netherlands.  It  is  well  known  that  in  the 
provinces  of  Brabant  and  Flanders  alone  the  Gueux  de- 
stroyed in  less  than  five  days  more  than  four  hundred 
churches  and  cathedrals;  that  they  perpetrated  upon  priests, 
religious,  and  the  Catholic  faithful  atrocities  which  could 
not  be  believed,  if  the  lamentable  facts  were  not  confirmed 
by  incontestable  historical  documents. 

Such  was  everywhere  the  conduct  of  Protestants  toward 
those  who  remained  faithful  to  the  religion  of  their  fathers. 
Let  us  not  forget  that  the  reformers  proclaimed  free  in- 
terpretation of  the  Scriptures,  that  is,  the  right  to  believe  what 
one  pleases,  as  the  fundamental  dogma  of  the  new  rehgion. 

III.   Intolerance    of  Other   Enemies  of  the 
Church.^ 

The  philosophy  of  the  eighteenth  century  has  shown  itself 
little  less  gentle  or  tolerant  than  Protestantism.  The  same 
Rousseau  who  vigorously  protested  against  the  cruel  dogma 
of  intolerance,  and  who  recognized  nothing  true  in  any 
positive  religion,  does  not  hesitate  to  declare  that  the  State 
may  prescribe  a  civil,  consequently  positive,  rehgion  and  that 
under  pain  of  death !  It  belongs  to  the  sovereign,  he  says 
in  the  Contrat  social,  'Ho  fix  the  articles  of  religion."  Then 
he  adds  these  words,  in  which  cruelty  rivals  effrontery: 
'^  Without  the  power  of  compelhng  any  one  to  believe  the 
articles  of  faith  contained  in  the  religion  of  a  country,  the 
sovereign  may  banish  from  the  State  those  who  do  not 
believe  them,  not  on  the  ground  of  impiety,  but  as  detri- 
mental to  the  State.  ...  If  any  one  after  pubhcly  ac- 
knowledging these  dogmas  conduct  himself  as  though  he  did 
not  beheve  them,  he  should  he  put  to  death;  he  has  committed 

*  On  persecution  in  Russia  and  Poland  see  Parsons,  Studies,  V., 
ch.  3,  4  (A.  C.  Q.,  xxii.,  xxiii.) ;  D.  R.  Old  Ser.  xiv.  223,  Oct.  '95;  C.  W. 
lix.  757;  M.  Ixxx.  166,  Sept.  '95. 


CERTAIN    ACCUSATIONS   AGAINST   THE    CHURCH.  465 

the  greatest  of  crimes,  he  has  hed  before  the  law."    Yet, 
according  to  Rousseau,  no  man's  faith  should  be  forced. 

This  tolerance  of  the  sophist  of  Geneva  is  still  that  of  cer- 
tain quasi-humanitarian  philosophers  of  our  day.  Some 
of  them  go  so  far  as  to  regret  that  the  reformers  in  1793  did 
not  complete  their  work  of  destruction;  they  are  only  wait- 
ing an  opportunity  to  resort  to  brute  force  against  Catholi- 
cism in  order  to  render  the  practice  of  it  absolutely  impos- 
sible, to  stifle  it  in  the  mire.  Witness  the  urgent  counsels 
given  by  Edgar  Quinet;  they  are  addressed  to  all  who,  like 
himself,  are  inspired  with  satanic  hatred  of  the  Church. 
The  events  which  have  taken  place  before  our  eyes  show 
that  these  counsels  of  sovereign  intolerance  were  understood 
and  followed.  ^ 

Remark. — No  doubt  there  have  been  Catholic  princes 
who,  through  excess  of  imenlightened  zeal,  resorted  to  vio- 
lence to  convert  infidels  or  sectarians,  but  in  doing  so  they 
followed  their  personal  inspiration  and  not  the  rules  of  the 
Church.  The  Church  does  not  admit  this  kind  of  apostolate, 
and  she  cannot  be  held  responsible  for  that  which  she  con- 
demns. It  is  quite  otherwise  with  Protestantism  and  in- 
fidelity: here  the  very  founders  of  the  Reformation,  the 
leaders  themselves  of  infidel  philosophy,  incited  the  most 
cruel  intolerance  by  word  and  example.  Yet  it  is  remarkable 
how  rarely  the  enemies  of  the  Church  are  heard  to  condemn 
these  atrocities.  On  the  contrary,  they  praise  and  encourage 
the  countries  where  Catholics  are  oppressed  at  the  present 
day,  and  their  intolerant  conduct  is  held  up  as  worthy  of 
imitation.  Is  not  this  the  climax  of  injustice,  of  unfairness, 
of  inconsistency? 

^  What  a  terrible  commentary  upon  this  modern  "  Gospel  of  Toler- 
ance "  is  furnished  by  the  Masonic  persecution  raging  this  very  day 
against  the  religious  orders  and  the  hierarchy  in  France  I — Editor, 


466  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 


IV.    On  the  Maxim:   Outside  the  Church  there  Is  No 

Salvation.^ 

But  the  Catholic  Church  cannot,  it  will  be  said,  defend 
herself  against  the  charge  of  intolerance  and  cruelty  when 
she  publicly  proclaims  that  there  is  no  salvation  for  those 
who  die  outside  her  fold.  What  numbers  she  condemns 
to  eternal  damnation  only  because  they  do  not  belong  to 
the  Church  of  Rome!  We  have  already  given  in  a  few  words 
the  solution  of  this  difficulty.  But  what  we  have  said  re- 
quires further  development.  We  shall  see  whether  the  old 
man  whom  Rousseau  causes  to  speak  in  such  moving  terms, 
really  deserves  our  pity.^ 

This  maxim  is  only  a  perfectly  rational  conclusion  of  that 

*  Dr.  Edw.  Hawarden,  Charity  and  Truth;  Hay,  Sincere  Christian, 
vol.  ii.,  append.;  Schanz,  III.,  ch.  9;  Ryder  (C.  T.  S.,  vol.  v.);  Balmes, 
Letters  to  a  Sceptic,  1.  16;  Hunter,  i.,  n.  181;  Walsh,  The  Saved  and 
Lost;  Rickaby,  Oxf.  C,  I.,  ch.  3;  Br.  W.  v.  571;  C.  W.  xxxi.  481, 
xlvii.  145,  xlviii.  509;  A.  E.  R.,  July  '92;  M.  Ivii.  363,  Ixxiii.  236,  344. 

'  Protestants  figure  most  prominently  among  those  who  attack 
the  Catholic  Church  on  the  subject  of  this  maxim.  Yet  this  princi- 
ple v/ith  which  they  reproach  the  Church  is  a  logical  consequence  of 
the  doctrine  of  their  principal  leaders.  Hence  they  are  in  contradic- 
tion with  themselves.  What  right  have  they  to  censure  in  us  that 
which  they  themselves  have  to  admit,  that  which  is  explicitly  pro- 
fessed in  the  formulas  of  faith  drawn  up  in  the  earliest  stages  of 
Protestantism  ?  For  example,  we  read  in  the  Helvetic  Confession  of 
Faith  of  1565:  "  There  is  no  salvation  outside  the  hurch,  any  more 
than  there  was  outside  the  ark;  and  if  we  would  have  life,  we  must 
not  separate  from  the  true  Church  of  Jesus  Christ.'  The  Saxon,  the 
Belgian,  and  the  Scotch  Confessions  of  Faith  are  no  less  explicit  on 
this  point.  "  Outside  the  Church,"  says  also  the  Calvinist  catechism 
of  the  seventeenth  century,  "there  is  only  damnation:  all  who  sepa- 
rate from  the  commimion  of  the  faithful  to  form  a  sect  apart  should 
not  hope  for  salvation  so  long  as  they  remain  thus  separated." 
Moreover,  Calvin  himself  affirms  in  his  "  Institutions  "  that  "  outside 
the  Church  we  cannot  hope  for  the  remission  of  sins  or  for 
salvation." 


CERTAIN  ACCUSATIONS  AGAINST  THE  CHURCH.      467 

which  has  been  previously  demonstrated.  In  fact,  if  the 
true  rehgion,  that  of  Jesus  Christ,  is  necessary  for  salvation, 
and  if  this  religion  is  exclusively  that  of  the  Church  of  Rome, 
we  have  to  acknowledge  that  outside  the  Church  of  Rome 
there  is  no  salvation;  in  other  words,  that  no  one  can  be 
saved  if  he  does  not  belong  in  some  way  to  this  Church. 
Hence,  if  this  doctrine  is  censurable,  it  is  not  the  Church 
that  should  be  reproached  therefor,  but  her  divine  Founder, 
who  made  His  religion  obligatory  for  all. 

To  justify  the  Church,  it  is  sufficient  to  state  precisely  the 
meaning  and  scope  of  the  incriminated  formula.  Let  us 
explain,  therefore,  in  what  way,  according  to  Catholic  doc- 
trine, we  must  belong  to  the  Church  in  order  to  be  saved. 

*'In  this  sentence:  Outside  the  Church  there  is  no  salva- 
tion, there  is,"  says  Card.  Dechamps,  ''as  in  every  penal  law, 
a  word  to  be  supplied ;  this  word  is  voluntarily,  since  every 
penal  law  supposes  guilt,  and  guilt  supposes  in  its  turn  two 
conditions :  fact  and  intention.  Hence  to  the  question :  Does 
the  Church  believe  that  there  is  no  salvation  for  persons 
who,  born  and  brought  up  where  they  could  have  no  knowl- 
edge of  the  Church,  are  in  invincible  ignorance  of  the  law 
of  Jesus  Christ,  but  have  faithfully  followed  the  light  they 
possessed?  we  must  answer  that  such  is  not  the  belief  of 
the  Church."  1 

It  is  certain,  in  fact,  that  a  law  is  not  of  obligation  when  it 
is  not  promulgated,  and  that  it  cannot  bind  the  consciences  of 
those  to  whom  it  is  unknown.  Thus  it  was  after  He  had  said 
to  His  apostles,  ''Go  preach  the  Gospel  to  every  creature," 
that  Our  Saviour  added,  "  He  that  doth  not  believe  is  already 
judged."  The  unbelief,  therefore,  which  excludes  from  sal- 
vation is  that  which  knows  and  resists  the  truth.  As  St. 
Paul  says,  "  How  then  shall  they  call  on  him  in  whom  they 
have  not  beheved?    Or  how  shall  they  believe  him,  of  whom 

^  Newman,  Certain  Difficulties  felt  by  Anglicans  in  Catholic  Teach- 
ing, vol.  i.,  pp.  354-5;  Lilly,  Characteristics  from  the  Writings  of  Card. 
Manning,  p.  247  ff. 


468  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

they  have  not  heard?  .  .  .  Faith  then  cometh  by  hearing, 
and  hearing  by  the  word  of  Christ. "     (Rom.  x.  14,  17.) 

Moreover,  the  theological  axiom  which  we  have  already 
quoted:  ''To  him  who  does  what  depends  upon  himself  God 
will  not  refuse  His  grace, "  is  perfectly  applicable  to  the  present 
question.  He  who  shall  have  followed  the  hght  of  reason, 
and  lived  in  conformity  with  that  which  he  beheves  is  truth, 
cannot  be  lost.  "One  may,"  says  the  learned  Cardinal 
again,  ''belong  in  heart,  though  not  in  body,  to  the  Church. 
Is  it  not  very  clear  that  every  man  in  good  faith  belongs  in 
heart  to  the  Church,  since  he  would  enter  it  if  he  recognized 
it  as  teaching  truth?  Are  not  all  who  have  a  sincere  and 
general  desire  to  chng  to  truth,  to  do  God's  will,  in  this  dis- 
position? It  is,  in  other  words,  a  question  of  baptism  of 
desire,  a  desire  implicitly  and  adequately  contained,  as  St. 
Thomas  Aquinas  says,  in  the  general  will  to  use  the  means 
of  salvation  granted  by  divine  Providence  to  man.  They, 
therefore,  who,  in  the  event  of  recognizing  the  Church,  are 
prepared  to  cast  themselves  upon  her  bosom,  are  regarded 
by  God  as  her  children,  and  will  not  fail  to  receive  from  Him 
the  light  necessary  for  salvation.  God  the  Creator,  who 
chose  to  be  also  the  Saviour  of  the  world,  died  for  all  men, 
and  the  graces  granted  in  view  of  this  Victim  whom  the 
eternal  justice  beheld  immolated  from  the  beginning  of  the 
world,  occisus  ah  origine  mundi,  were  applied  to  all  men 
without  exception.  Hence  no  man  is  excluded  from  par- 
ticipation in  the  fruits  of  the  redemption  save  through  his 
own  fault,  through  resistance  to  grace,  and  each  one  will  be 
judged  according  to  that  which  he  has  received.  Could 
there  be  a  doctrine  more  lenient  and  at  the  same  time  more 
terrible:  more  lenient  for  the  blind  when  their  ignorance  is 
not  culpable,  and  more  terrible  for  the  ungrateful  who,  to 
avoid  the  hght  which  surrounds  them,  seek  in  darkness 
reasons  against  the  justice  of  God?" 

Let  us  add  a  few  words  of  explanation  to  those  of  the 
eminent  prelate;  we  shall  take  them  for  the  most  part  from 


CERTAIN   ACCUSATIONS   AGAINST   THE    CHURCH,  469 

P.  Ollivier^s  excellent  statement  of  the  subject  in  his  fifty- 
third  and  fifty-fourth  Conferences. 

Catholic  doctrine  distinguishes  in  the  Church  body  and 
soul.  The  body,  or  visible  part,  consists  of  the  members 
united  in  one  society  or  exterior  communion.  The  soul,  or 
the  invisible  part,  is  sanctifying  grace,  the  principle  of  super- 
natural hfe  which  renders  man  pleasing  to  God.  To  belong 
fully,  that  is,  by  right  and  fact,  to  the  body  of  the  Church 
it  is  necessary  first  to  enter  it  by  Baptism;  then,  when  we 
have  attained  the  age  of  reason,  to  adhere  to  it  voluntarily, 
with  full  knowledge,  by  an  act  of  Cathohc  faith;  finally,  we 
must  not  have  incurred  excommunication  or  have  separated 
from  the  Church  by  embracing  error.  To  belong  to  the  soul 
of  the  Church  it  suffices,  even  if  we  do  not  form  part  of  the 
body,  to  be  in  a  state  of  grace.  Hence  it  is  possible  to  belong 
to  the  Church,  and  consequently  to  be  saved,  without  forming 
part  of  the  body  of  the  Church.  In  other  terms,  according  to 
Catholic  doctrine,  heretics,  sectarians,  and  even  infidels  may 
possess  sanctifying  grace  and  obtain  salvation.  Let  us  ex- 
plain. 

1.  A  child  born  of  schismatic,  heretic,  or  infidel  parents 
who  receives  Baptism,  receives  with  it  sanctifying  grace,  and 
preserves  this  grace  as  long  as  he  is  not  guilty  of  mortal  sin. 
He  belongs  to  the  soul  of  the  Church,  and  if  he  dies  in  tliis  state 
he  will  undoubtedly  be  saved.  This  is  supposing,  of  course, 
that  the  child,  attaining  the  use  of  reason,  remains  in  invincible 
ignorance  of  the  true  religion,  because  it  is  impossible  for 
him  to  learn  of  it,  or  he  despises  it  because  he  has  no  doubt 
whatever  of  the  truth  of  the  rehgion  he  professes.  But 
every  one  born  or  brought  up  in  unbelief,  heresy,  or  schism  is 
bound  to  search  for  the  true  religion  as  soon  as  any  serious 
doubts  arise  in  his  mind  concerning  the  truth  of  his  creed. 
If  he  neglect  to  do  this,  he  can  no  longer  enjoy  the  benefit 
of  "good  faith"  and  commits  a  grievous  offence  against  God, 
the  source  and  object  of  the  true  religion.  Let  us  add  that 
if  a  man,  being  in  good  faith  (that  is,  by  invincible  ignorance) 


470  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

outside  the  visible  unity  of  God's  Church,  has  the  misfortune 
to  lose  sanctifying  grace  through  grave  sin,  he  may  be  recon- 
ciled again  with  God.  If  the  sect  to  which  he  belongs  has  re- 
tained the  Sacrament  of  Penance,  his  reconcihation  will  be 
effected  through  sacramental  confession  accompanied  with 
at  least  imperfect  contrition;  if  it  rejects  this  sacrament,  it 
will  be  by  the  employment  of  means  instituted  in  tliis  sect 
and  regarded  as  indispensable,  but  in  that  case  perfect  con- 
trition is  necessary  and  the  reason  therefor  is  evident:  he 
must  employ  these  means  because,  judging  them  indispen- 
sable, he  would  be  acting  contrary  to  his  conscience  if  he  did 
not  have  recourse  to  them.  At  the  same  time,  perfect  con- 
trition is  necessary  in  this  case,  as  the  means  are  inefficacious 
of  themselves. 

2.  As  to  7ion-haptized  children  and  adults  who  die  without 
attaining  the  use  of  reason,  we  have  already  stated  (p.  249, 
n.  1)  what  we  are  taught  concerning  their  lot.^  They  will 
enjoy  a  natural  good,  the  possession  of  which  would  have 
constituted  our  happiness  if  we  had  not  been  raised  to  the 
superior  order,  and  they  will  be  deprived  only  of  the  degree  of 
happiness  resulting  from  the  intuitive  vision  of  God,  a  degree 
of  happiness  which  is  due  to  no  one.^ 

Now  to  come  to  adult  infidels,  or  unbaptized  persons  who 
have  attained  the  use  of  reason — that  is,  Jews,  Mohammedans, 
and  pagans, — here  is  a  summary  of  what  the  Church  teaches 
regarding  them.  None  are  excluded  because  of  unbehef, 
except  those  whose  unbelief  is  voluntary,  either  directly  or  in 

^  Balmes,  1.  c,  1.  15;  C.  W.  li.  456. 

*  A  large  number  of  theologians,  certainly  the  majority,  not  to  say 
the  best  authorities  among  them,  affirm  that  the  punishment  of 
original  sin  consists  solely  in  the  privation  of  supernatural  happiness 
(the  sight  of  God) ,  a  happiness,  moreover,  which  is  not  due  man. 

St.  Thomas  maintains  that  children  who  die  without  Baptism  not 
only  will  not  suffer  the  pain  of  sense,  but  not  even  sadness  through 
the  pain  of  the  damned,  that  is,  through  the  privation  of  the  beatific 
vision.  Grave  theologians  admit  that  these  children  will  enjoy  a 
more  or  less  perfect  natural  happiness. 


CERTAIN  ACCUSATIONS   AGAINST  THfi    CHtJRCH.  471 

its  cause.  As  to  those  whose  unbehef  is  the  result  of  in- 
vincible ignorance,  if  they  are  lost,  it  will  not  be  because 
they  were  ignorant  of  that  which  it  was  impossible  for  them 
to  know/ 

Nay,  more,  we  are  permitted  to  believe  that  these  men 
may  positively  belong  to  the  soul  of  the  Church  and  conse- 
quently be  saved,  as  the  Gentiles  were  before  the  coming  of 
the  Messias.  After  the  example  of  the  Gentiles,  they  have 
only  to  obey  the  natural  law  engraven  in  all  hearts,  and  those 
primitive  traditions,  preserved  everywhere  though  frequently 
altered,  concerning  God  and  His  providence,  the  promise 
of  a  Redeemer,  the  rewards  and  punishments  which  await 
man  in  another  life.  True,  the  baptism  of  water  is  necessary 
for  all  who  know  of  its  necessity  and  who  can  receive  it; 
but  it  may  be  supplied  by  the  baptism  of  blood  and  the  bap- 
tism of  desire.  The  baptism  of  blood  suffices  for  it  in  those 
who  have  not  attained  the  use  of  reason,  when  they  are  put 
to  death  for  the  cause  of  Christ;  for  this  reason  the  Church 
celebrates  the  feast  of  the  Holy  Innocents  massacred  at 
Bethlehem  by  King  Herod.  The  baptism  of  desire  suffices 
for  those  who,  knowing  the  necessity  of  the  baptism  of  water 
and  being  for  any  reason  whatever  unable  to  receive  it,  have 
an  explicit  desire  for  it,  accompanied  by  perfect  contrition 
for  grave  sins.  It  is  even  certain  that  the  implicit  desire  of 
baptism,  that  is,  an  act  of  perfect  love  of  God,  for  the  reason 
that  it  implies  the  will  to  do  whatever  God  prescribes  for 
salvation,  sufficed  in  the  early  ages  of  the  Church  for  unbe- 
Hevers  among  whom  the  Gospel  had  not  yet  been  preached. 

'  All  theologians  distinguish  negative  from  positive  unbelief. 
Negative  unbelief  is  not  a  sin.  It  is  found  in  persons  who  do  not 
believe  in  Revelation  because  they  are  ignorant  of  it  through  no 
fault  of  their  own.  Positive  unbelief  is  a  sin  because  it  is  found  in 
those  to  whom  Revelation  has  been  sufficiently  revealed  and  taught. 
Such  persons  will  certainly  be  condemned  to  the  suffering  of  the 
damned  and  the  pain  of  sense,  for  they  are  guilty  of  an  actual  sin  of 
positive  unbelief.  Muzarrelli,  Du  Salut  des  paiens.  See  also  Balmes, 
1.  c,  1. 16;  A.  C.  Q.  be.  45;  I.  E.  R.,  Feb.  '93. 


472  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

The  Church  in  fact  regards  the  baptism  of  water  as  necessary 
to  salvation  only  from  the  period  of  the  preaching  of  the  Gos- 
pel. This  is  expressly  stated  in  the  Council  of  Trent.  Now 
the  Gospel  was,  and  could  be,  promulgated  only  by  degrees. 
Therefore,  if  there  were  means  of  salvation  besides  Baptism 
for  the  unbelievers  of  that  period,  because  the  Gospel  had  not 
been  announced  to  them,  why  should  not  these  same  means 
exist  for  unbelievers  of  later  centuries  who,  through  no 
fault  of  theirs,  are  in  the  same  condition?  This  is  not  an 
article  of  faith;  but  we  are  free  to  beheve  it,  and  the  Church 
does  not  contradict  it.  The  belief,  moreover,  is  conformable 
to  the  doctrine  of  great  theologians,  among  whom  we  must 
count  St.  Thomas  and  St.  Alphonsus  Liguori.^ 

To  sum  up  what  we  have  said,  let  us  observe  that  Catholic 
doctrine  excludes  from  salvation  for  not  having  embraced 

*  Let  us  observe  also  these  words  of  a  judicious  writer,  the  Abb6 
Ant.  Pirenne,  in  his  Etudes  philosophiques  sur  les  prindpales  questions 
de  la  religion  revelee:  "  Let  us  suppose  that  a  pagan  (it  is  the  same  with 
heretics  and  sectarians)  dies  loving  God  for  Himself  and  above  all 
things,  he  is  thereby  saved.  For  with  charity  (supernatural)  he  has 
everything:  charity  of  itself  justifies.  And  observe  that  the  small- 
est degree  of  charity  is  sufficient;  for  the  essence  of  a  virtue  does  not 
consist  in  its  intensity;  a  drop  of  water  is  as  truly  water  as  the 
ocean,  and  the  quantity  of  a  thing  does  not  influence  its  nature. 
Thus  charity  exists  with  attachment  to  venial  sin;  above  all,  it  may 
exist  without  any  sensible  devotion.  You  are  saved,  then,  if  you 
leave  this  life  loving  God  for  Himself  and  above  all  thiiigs  that  would 
involve  mortal  sin.  You  are  saved  whatever  the  circumstances  in 
which  you  find  yourself.  If  at  this  supreme  moment*  pagan,  heretic, 
or  schismatic,  you  receive  from  God  the  gift  of  charity,  even  a  small 
degree  of  it  which  does  not  take  away  your  attachment  to  venial  sin, 
you  have  sufficient  for  salvation,  for  charity  renders  contrition  per- 
fect; perfect  charity  and  contrition  include  the  desire,  at  least  implicit 
desire,  for  Baptism  and  confession. 

"If  we  would  know  in  what  way  charity  is  communicated  to  the 
faithful,  here  is  the  reply  of  Leibnitz,  a  reply  which  he  has  borrowed 
from  Catholic  theologians:  ^God  will  give  what  is  necessary  to  all 
who  do  what  humanly  depends  upon  them,  even  if  it  were  necessary  to 
vork  a  miracle.' '' 


CERTAIN   ACCUSATIONS   AGAINST   THE    CHURCH.  473 

the  true  faith  only  those  who  have  been  wilfully  ignorant 
of  revealed  truth,  that  is,  who  have  not  wished  to  know  it,  and 
those  who,  having  an  adequate  knowledge  of  it,  have  refused 
to  embrace  it.  Those  only  are  actuMly  bound  to  enter  the 
Church  who  know  her  to  be  the  necessary  means  of  attaining 
salvation.  Hence  the  formula  ''Outside  the  Church  there 
is  no  salvation"  is  in  every  way  rational  and  logical;  and 
they  who  cite  it  against  the  Church  do  so  in  error  or  bad 
faith — ^in  error  when  they  misapprehend  the  precise  and  full 
meaning  of  the  axiom,  and  in  bad  faith  when  they  refuse  to 
acknowledge  it. 

But  does  not  the  rigor  of  the  Inquisition  contradict  this 
reputation  for  clemency  which  we  would  maintain  for  the 
Church?  The  charge  is  unceasingly  repeated  in  books, 
journals,  periodicals,  and  pamphlets  hostile  to  our  faith. 
Hence  it  is  necessary  to  treat  separately  a  question  which 
gives  rise  to  so  much  malicious  declamation. 

ART.  II.— THE  INQUISITION. 

This  is  the  great  accusation  made  against  the  Church  by 
her  enemies:  the  word  Inquisition  is  cast  in  her  face  as  sen- 
tence of  condemnation  from  which  there  is  no  appeal. 

It  is  well  to  remark,  first,  that,  with  the  exception  of  a 
few  who  are  ignorantly  deceived  or  misled,  hatred  of  the 
Inquisition  is  confounded  with  hatred  of  the  Church. 

We  know  the  style  of  argument  used  by  the  enemies  of 
this  institution  in  their  romances  and  plays.  Their  object 
is  to  make  a  vivid  impression  on  the  imagination  and  excite 
the  feehngs  by  a  touching  picture  or  a  clever  dramatic  ren- 
dering. They  take  good  care  not  to  say  that  the  tortures  at 
which  they  make  us  assist,  though  so  contrary  to  our  pres- 
ent customs,  were  nevertheless  conformable  in  every  respect 
to  the  penal  code  of  past  centuries  and  to  the  customs  of  all 
the  tribunals  of  those  times.  With  them,  the  moment  that 
|)lood  flows,  that  fires  are  kindled,  the  cause  is  judged;  and  the 


474  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

tribunal  is  wrong.  They  do  not  reason,  they  declaim;  they 
do  not  try  to  convince  minds,  but  to  excite  the  passions. 

This  is  not  the  proper  method  of  history:  it  should  be 
animated  by  no  passion  but  love  of  truth.  "The  first  law,'' 
says  Leo  XIII.  in  a  letter  in  which  he  strongly  recommends 
historical  studies,  "  is  to  advance  nothing  that  is  false  and  to 
shrink  from  no  truth." 

Above  all  things,  we  must  carefully  distinguish  between 
the  ecclesiastical  Inquisition  and  the  Spanish  Inquisition.^ 

a.  Inquisition  means,  generally,  to  search  for  heretics  in 
order  to  prevent  the  spread  of  their  tenets,  or  to  convert  them. 
In  this  sense  the  Inquisition  dates  from  the  beginning  of 
the  Church.  It  has  ever  been  the  bounden  duty  of  popes 
and  bishops  to  resist  heresy,  and  to  prevent  its  propagation, 
either  by  gentle,  persuasive  measures  or  by  means  of  chas- 
tisements. 

h.  Nevertheless,  by  the  Inquisition  is  generally  understood 
a  court  of  justice,  both  civil  and  ecclesiastic,  called  the  Holy 
Office,  estabhshed  to  take  cognizance  of  the  crime  of  heresy, 
and  to  punish  the  guilty.  This  special  tribunal  dates  only 
from  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth  century,  when  it  was 
estabhshed  by  Innocent  III.  to  repress  the  heresy  of  the 
Waldenses  and  the  Albigenses.^  These  sectaries,  reproduc- 
ing the  heresy  of  the  Manichseans,  spread  the  spirit  of  rebelHon 
with  their  errors,  and,  resorting  to  arms,  threatened  both 
Church  and  State.  After  vain  efforts  to  bring  them  back 
to  their  common  duty  by  instruction  and  moral  suasion,  the 

^Hefele,  Life  of  Card.  Ximenes;  Parsons,  Lies,  p.  121  £f.;  Studies, 
IL,  ch.  31;  Balmes,  ch.  36,  37.  See  Maistre;  Dwenger;  Hergenrother, 
Catholic  Church,  etc.,  vol.  ii..  Essay  17;  Spalding,  J.  M.,  Miscell., 
Essay  11;  Lacordaire,  The  Order  of  St.  Dominic,  ch.  6;  Sidney  Smith, 
S.J.  (C.  T.  S.  xix);  A.  C.  Q.  i.  254,  xii.  691,  xiii.  385  (on  H.  Lea's 
deceiving  book),  XXV.  531  ff.;  M.  xlix.  82,lxxiv.  375;  D.  R.  Old  Ser. 
xxviii.  421,  New  Ser.  viii.  53,  ix.  163,  Apr.  1894,  p.  309  (Albigenses) ; 
C.  C.  S.  L.  ii.  p.  7;  also  references  on  p.  442. 

2  See  Melia's  work  on  the  Waldenses;  also  Parsons,  Studies,  II., 
ch.25,  27;  L  E.  R.,  Nov. '94. 


CERTAIN   ACCUSATIONS   AGAINST   THE    CHURCH.  475 

two  powers  menaced  united  against  the  common  enemy;  it 
was  the  duty  of  the  ecclesiastical  power  to  establish,  that 
is  to  verify,  the  crime,  and  of  the  civil  power  to  administer 
the  punishment.  The  end  of  this  ecclesiastical  Inquisition 
always  was  to  preserve  Cathohc  nations  from  the  poison  of 
heresy,  and  States  from  revolt,  which  was  the  usual  conse- 
quence of  heresy.  The  office  of  Inquisitor  was  usually  con- 
fided to  legates  or  delegates,  among  whom  shone  in  the  first 
rank  the  sons  of  St.  Dominick,  but  only  from  the  year  1223, 
that  is,  twelve  years  after  the  death  of  St.  Dominick,  which 
fact,  however,  does  not  save  the  saint  from  being  frequently 
transformed  into  a  Grand  Inquisitor. 

This  Inquisition,  born  in  the  bosom  of  the  mother 
Church  of  all  churches  and  successively  introduced  into  all 
parts  of  the  Christian  world,  is  certainly  the  work  of  the 
Roman  pontiffs,  who  have  never  regretted  its  establishment. 

c.  Quite  different  was  the  Spanish  Inquisition  founded  by 
Ferdinand  and  Isabella  in  1481  to  protect  with  the  Christian 
faith  the  nationality  of  Spain  against  the  machinations  of 
the  Jews  and  the  Moors.  ^  In  this  tribimal  also  we  find  two 
distinct  jurisdictions,  one  of  which  is  exercised  by  the  Church 
and  the  other  by  the  civil  power.  But  here  the  civil  power 
had  such  a  preponderating  influence  that  a  number  of  his- 
torians, though  inimical  to  Catholicism,  regard  the  Spanish 
Inquisition  as  more  political  than  religious. 

Nevertheless  we  do  not  pretend  to  disclaim  for  the  Church 
all  responsibility  in  the  Spanish  Inquisition.  We  acknowl- 
edge that  Sixtus  IV.  approved  the  first  thought  of  the  In- 
quisition in  Spain  and  sanctioned  its  fundamental  statutes. 
It  was  from  the  Holy  See  that  the  ecclesiastical  inquisitors 
received  their  jurisdiction  and  all  their  powers.  The  king, 
however,  received  from  the  Pope  the  privilege  of  naming 
the  inquisitors. 

Object  of  the  Discussion. — All  discussion  on  the  subject 

*  On  the  persecution  of  the  Jews  in  Spain  see  C.  W.  liv.  360,  Iv.  649, 
851,  Iviii.  49;  see  ib.  Dec.  1899,  "The  Popes  and  the  Jews." 


476  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

of  the  Inquisition  may  be  reduced  to  the  two  following  ques- 
tions, very  distinct  one  from  the  other. 

First  Question. — Was  the  institution  of  this  tribunal  lawful 
in  principle  and  moral  right? 

Second  Question. — Do  the  proceedings  of  the  Inquisition 
as  known  to  us  through  history  merit  the  condemnation 
with  which  our  enemies  would  brand  them,  and  can  they 
be  made  a  charge  against  the  Church? 

Let  us  not  forget  that  in  all  this  discussion  there  is  no  ques- 
tion of  unbelievers,  pagans  or  Jews,  over  which  the  Church 
has  no  jurisdiction,  but  only  of  Christians,  that  is,  of  those 
whom  the  regeneration  of  Baptism  made  amenable  to  the 
laws  of  the  Church.  The  first,  says  St.  Thomas,  certainly 
should  not  be  forced  to  obey  the  Church;  the  others,  on  the 
contrary,  should:  contra  vero,  alteri  sunt  cogendi. 

I.  Lawfulness  of  the  Inquisition  in  Principle. 

A.  On  the  Part  of  the  Church. — There  can  be  no  doubt 
of  this  in  the  mind  of  a  Catholic.  Popes  and  councils,  saints 
and  doctors,  Scripture  and  tradition  proclaim  that  the  Church 
has  the  right,  and  that  it  is  also  her  duty,  to  watch  over  the 
purity  of  the  faith,  and  to  inflict  penalties,  even  corporal 
penalties,  on  her  children  who  wander  from  the  faith  and 
become  a  stone  of  stumbling  to  their  brethren.^    This  unde- 

^  In  the  light  of  Catholic  dogma  it  is  always  a  crime  in  an  adult 
Catholic  "to  wander  from  the  faith."  The  Church  teaches  (a)  that 
faith  is  an  imperative  duty  of  man  towards  God,  as  without  faith  it 
is  impossible  to  please  God;  (6)  that  this  faith  is  a  supernatural  gift 
of  God  which  man,  once  he  has  received  it,  cannot  lose  except  by  his 
own  free  will ;  (c)  that  she  herself  is  the  divinely  appointed  and  in- 
fallible teacher  of  revealed  truth,  which  is  the  proper  object  of  divine 
faith;  (d)  that  there  cannot  possibly  be  any  reason  whatever  of 
denying  this  faith  once  professed;  (e)  that  consequently  to  wander 
from  the  Catholic  faith  is  a  most  grievous  sin  against  God  and  against 
His  holy  Church. 

From  this  it  follows  evidently  that  the  Catholic  Church  alone  can 
consistently  claim  the  right  of  punishing  apostasy  from  her  faith; 


CERTAIN   ACCUSATIONS   AGAINST   THE    CHURCH.  477 

niable  right,  which  flows  from  the  powers  which  Jesus  Christ 
has  conferred  upon  her,  the  Church  has  always  exercised; 
she  has  always  considered  the  crimes  of  heresy,  of  apostasy, 
and  of  sacrilege  as  deserving  of  punishment  as  outrages 
upon  the  honor,  the  property,  or  the  life  of  a  fellow  being. 
This  doctrine  and  this  conduct  of  the  Church  are  perfectly 
reasonable  and  lawful.  In  fact  it  is  the  right  and  duty  of 
every  society  to  provide  for  the  salvation  of  its  members 
and  to  watch  over  its  own  preservation.  Without  this  right 
it  could  not  exist.  The  Church,  a  perfect  society,  proAdded 
by  her  divine  Founder  with  all  that  is  necessary  for  her  preser- 
vation and  her  propagation,  possesses  this  right  then,  and  can, 
in  consequence,  make  laws  and  punish  those  of  her  subjects 
who  do  not  observe  them.  If  they  are  recalcitrant  and 
contumacious,  devios  et  contumaces,  according  to  the  ex- 
pression of  Benedict  XIV.,  the  Church,  hke  a  tender  but  firm 
mother,  exercises  her  right,  and  fulfils  her  duty  by  correct- 
ing them,  in  order  that  chastisement  may  bring  them  back 
to  the  right  path,  and  prevent  others  from  being  led  away 
by  their  pernicious  example.  She  acts  in  this  respect  like 
the  father  of  a  family  who  takes  wise  and  efficacious  meas- 
ures to  correct  his  children  and  to  preserve  his  home  from 
anything  of  a  nature  to  disturb  its  peace  and  happiness. 
Her  course  is  analogous  to  that  of  the  governments  of  the 
present  day  when  they  adopt  vigorous  precautions  to  pre- 
vent the  entrance  of  pestilence,  cholera,  or  any  epidemic 
whatever,  or  when  they  establish  a  corps  of  special  agents 
to  seek  out  malefactors,  conspirators,  assassins,  and  hand 
them  over  to  the  vengeance  of  the  law,  and  prevent  the 
execution  of  their  nefarious  designs. 

The  Inquisition  was  in  religious  society  what  parental 
discipline  is  in  the  family,  what  health  boards,  police  boards, 
medical  corps,  and  tribunals  of  justice  are  in  civil  society,  that 

and  that  no  State  can  consistently  put  heresy  on  its  criminal  code 
unless  it  professes  the  Catholic  faith. — Editor. 


478  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

is,  a  means  of  conservation  for  itself  and  of  preservation 
for  its  members. 

B.  On  the  Part  of  the  State. — When  we  wish  to  judge 
the  lawfulness  of  an  institution  we  must  transport  ourselves 
to  the  time  when  it  was  established.  It  is  well  known  that 
at  the  period  of  the  Inquisition  European  society  was  pro- 
foundly Christian;  the  people  were  as  universally  convinced 
of  the  truth  of  CathoHc  dogma  as  we,  in  our  modern  societies, 
can  be  of  the  truth  of  the  principles  of  the  natural  law; 
hence  revolt  against  God  was  justly  regarded  as  no  less 
treasonable  than  revolt  against  the  king. 

Rulers  and  people,  accepting  Catholic  faith  as  the  only  true 
and  divine  religion,  considered  its  preservation  of  paramount 
importance  to  all  natural  advantages.  The  legislation  of 
the  various  countries  of  Europe  was  founded  upon  an  inti- 
mate union  of  Church  and  State.  Consequently  every  overt 
act  of  disobedience  to  the  laws  of  religion  was  punishable 
by  the  civil  law.  Human  law  cannot,  of  course,  enter  the 
secret  domain  of  conscience,  accessible  only  to  God;  it  cannot 
prescribe  interior  acts  or  punish  violations  which  are  not 
exterior. 

Under  such  circumstances  nothing  could  be  more  natural 
than  the  establishment  of  tribunals  the  office  of  which  was  to 
discover,  by  lawful  and  honest  means,  exterior  violations  of 
the  religious  law,  to  discern  between  obstinate  heretics  and 
those  who  were  only  misled  for  a  time,  to  punish  the  real  crim- 
inals and  proclaim  the  innocence  of  others.  Such  tribunals 
were  as  lawful  as  the  tribunals  of  the  present  day  estabhshed 
to  judge  offences  against  the  State,  or  the  person,  reputa- 
tion, or  property  of  citizens. 

It  was  because  they  were  penetrated  ^vith  these  truths 
that  Theodosius  the  Great,  Justinian,  Charlemagne,  Otho 
the  Great,  Louis  IX.,  and  all  civiUzed  rulers  and  nations 
considered  it  no  violation  of  liberty  to  punish  heresy  or 
apostasy. 

Conclusion. — In  a  society  formed  according  to  the  prin- 


CERTAIN   ACCUSATIONS   AGAINST   THE    CHURCH.  479 

ciples  and  based  upon  the  legislation  we  have  described,  no 
one  could  reasonably  deny  that  the  Church  acted  in  all  wisdom 
in  estabhshing  in  concert  with  the  civil  power,  to  which  she 
referred  the  chastisement  of  culprits,  a  tribunal  for  discern- 
ing the  real  criminal  with  greater  guarantees  of  justice,  and 
taking  cognizance  of  an  offence  regarded  as  one  of  the  gravest . 
against  both  the  social  and  the  religious  order. 

If  there  are  those  who  have  any  difficulty  in  accepting 
this  conclusion,  it  is  because  we  live  in  an  atmosphere  steeped 
in  error.  The  enemies  of  the  Church,  to  favor  the  propaga- 
tion of  evil  and  for  their  own  safety,  never  cease  to  hold  up 
every  attempt  to  repress  impiety  and  heresy,  as  an  outrage 
upon  what  they  falsely  call  the  sacred  rights  of  conscience. 

It  is  nevertheless  incontestable  that  no  one  has  the  right 
to  do  evil,  that  no  one  has,  or  can  have,  as  it  is  claimed  at 
the  present  day,  a  natural  and  imprescriptible  right  to  think, 
to  write,  and  to  propagate  whatever  he  pleases.  Created 
by  God  and  dependent  upon  Him  for  all  things,  man  has  no 
right  to  outrage  and  blaspheme  the  Author  of  his  existence. 
Made  a  child  of  the  Church  by  baptism,  he  has  no  right  to 
revolt  against  his  Mother.  Member  of  a  society,  he  has  no 
right  to  break  down  the  foundations  upon  which  this  society 
rests.  Endowed  with  free-will  to  do  good  meritoriously, 
he  has  no  right  to  abuse  this  faculty  by  corrupting  his  breth- 
ren and  leading  them  to  evil. 

It  is  no  less  incontestable  that  there  are  errors  which  are 
criminal.  Yes,  there  are  perversions  of  reason  which  cannot 
practically  be  distinguished  from  moral  perversions.  Man 
is  obhged,  above  all  things,  to  cling  to  truth,  and  to  preserve 
his  intelligence  from  error;  this  is  evident,  since  to  will  it  is 
necessary  to  know,  and  to  will  righteously  we  must  know  the 
truth.  If  there  were  no  rule  for  thought,  there  could  be  none 
for  actions.  What  would  then  become  of  morals  and  of 
society?  Among  culpable  errors,  sins  of  incredulity,  heresy, 
and  apostasy  rank  first.  In  fact  there  is  no  outrage  upon 
the  honor,  the  life,  the  property  of  man,  a  simple  creature, 


480  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

which  ranks  in  enormity  with  those  monstrous  crimes  which 
directly  attack  the  Creator  Himself.  To  refuse  obstinately 
to  beheve  in  the  revelation  of  God,  when  adequately  known 
and  demonstrated,  is  a  crime  of  treason  against  the  Divine 
Majesty,  for  it  is,  in  a  measure,  denying  the  infinite  truth  of 
God.  Now  at  the  time  and  in  the  countries  where  the  Inqui- 
sition reigned  it  was  easy  for  all  to  have  a  complete  moral 
certainty  (proportioned  to  the  condition  and  development 
of  each  mind)  of  the  divinity  of  the  Christian  religion,  and 
of  the  Catholic  Church.^ 

II.  The  Proceedings  of  the  Inquisition. 

We  have  just  proved  that  the  Inquisition  was  lawful  in 
principle;  that  in  the  times  and  in  the  countries  where  it 
was  established  it  was  lawful  to  adopt  rigorous  measures 
against  the  propagation  of  religious  errors.  But  is  there 
nothing  censurable  in  the  way  in  which  this  right  was  exer- 
cised, was  it  not  exercised  with  cruelty?  This  is  the  question 
to  be  examined  at  present.  We  shall  reply  to  it  with  the 
aid  of  a  few  remarks. 

First  Remark. — Let  us  observe,  first  of  all,  that  this 
question  is  by  no  means  as  important  as  the  first.  It  would, 
in  fact,  be  absurd  to  hold  the  Church  responsible  for  abuses 
of  which  the  judges  in  the  Inquisition  may  have  been  guilty. 
Just  as  a  man  can  be  reasonably  held  responsible  only  for  the 
effects  and  results  of  his  personal  actions,  in  Hke  manner  a 
social  body  can  be  charged  only  with  what  is  the  result  of 
its  existence,  of  its  social  action,  or,  in  other  words,  of  its  con- 
stituent principles,  of  its  laws,  and  the  regular  exercise  of 
authority.  Would  it  be  just  to  attribute  to  civil  laws  or 
to  mihtary  regulations  abuses  of  authority  connected  with 
these  laws  and  regulations,  but  condemned  by  them?  Now 
the  abuses  with  which  the  Inquisition  is  charged  are  far  from 
being  the  fruit  of  the  principles  of  CathoHcism :  they  are  even 
^  See  also,  on  Tolerance,  references  p.  442, 


CERTAIN  ACCUSATIONS   AGAINST  THE    CHURCH.  481 

opposed  to  its  spirit,  and  were  in  fact  severely  condemned 
by  the  sovereign  Pontiffs  each  time  they  were  brought  to 
their  knowledge. 

Second  Remark. — We  must  also  bear  in  mind  that  the 
judges  charged  to  pronounce  penal  sentence  for  the  crime  of 
heresy  were  civil  judges;  the  ecclesiastical  authority  con- 
fined itself  to  estabhshing  the  crime.  The  severe,  the  terrible 
punishments,  particularly  the  capital,  were  administered  by 
the  government,  of  whom  an  account  should  be  required 
when  there  is  occasion  for  censure.  We  have  seen,  moreover, 
that  a  Christian  and  Catholic  State,  in  lending  the  Church 
the  assistance  of  the  secular  arm,  was  only  fulfilling  a  duty: 
protecting  the  imprescriptible  rights  of  truth  and  removing 
all  that  endangered  the  capital  interests  of  society.  More- 
over, the  clemency  which  played  so  important  a  role  in  the 
sentences  of  the  Inquisition  is  the  work  of  the  Church,  which 
had  no  part  in  the  punishments  except  to  repress  them,  to 
mitigate  them,  or  to  recommend  the  culprits  to  the  indulgence 
of  the  judge.^  Hence  the  reputation  for  mildness  which  the 
ecclesiastical  tribunals  enjoyed.  It  was  this  reputation  for 
clemency  which  induced  the  Templars  at  the  time  of  their 
celebrated  trial  to  ask  expressly  to  be  judged  by  the  ecclesias- 
tical Inquisition;  they  knew,  historians  tell  us,  that  if  they 
went  before  such  judges  they  would  not  be  sentenced  to 
capital  punishment.  But  Phihp  le  Bel,  whose  mind  was 
already  made  up,  and  who  knew  the  inevitable  consequence 
of  recourse  to  this  tribunal,  shut  himself  up  with  his  state 
council  and  summarily  condemned  the  Templars  to  death.^ 

Moreover,  if  the  spirit  of  the  Church  is  a  spirit  of  mildness 
we  must  expect  to  see  it  especially  manifested  at  Rome. 
Hence  we  find  Clement  IV.  reproaching  St.  Louis  himself 
with  the  excessive  severity  of  the  laws  which  the  great  mon- 
arch had  made  against  blasphemers,  and  earnestly  begging 
him  in  his  bull  of  1208  to  mitigate  them.    And  in  our  own 

^  Hefele,  Life  of  Ximenes,  ch.  18. 

» Parsons,  Studies,  IL,  ch.  35;  D.  R;,  Oct.  '95,  p.  329. 


482  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

day  nowhere  are  Jews  better  treated  than  in  Rome,  so  much 
so  that  it  has  passed  into  a  proverb  that  the  city  of  the 
popes  is  the  paradise  of  the  Jews.  In  Germany,  where  there 
was  a  number  of  ecclesiastical  sovereigns,  a  similar  proverb 
existed:  ''It  is  good  to  hve  under  the  cross."  ''Never," 
says  Joseph  de  Maistre,  "  was  there  in  these  peaceful  govern- 
ments any  question  of  capital  punishment  or  persecution  of 
the  enemies  of  the  reigning  powers." 

Third  Remark. — It  is  a  mark  of  strange  historical  igno- 
rance or  singular  audacity  in  calumny  to  represent  cruel 
sufferings  and  instruments  of  torture  as  belonging  distinctly 
and  exclusively  to  the  Inquisition.  Yet  we  find  this  stated 
constantly  in  anti-rehgious  books  and  journals.  Such  pun- 
ishments were  in  fact  universal.  It  could  be  easily  proved 
that  the  tribimals  of  the  Inquisition  were  generally  much 
more  just  and  much  less  severe  toward  the  accused  than  all 
the  civil  tribimals  of  the  period.^  Hefele,  even  accepting 
the  data  of  the  partial  historian  Llorente,  furnishes  such 
proof  in  regard  to  the  Spanish  Inquisition,  the  most  decried 
of  all.^  If  we  would  form  an  idea  of  the  character  of  the 
civil  tribunals  of  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries,  we 
ought  to  read  the  learned  memoir  of  M.  Poullet,  professor 
in  the  University  of  Louvain:  Histoire  du  droit  penal  dans 
le  duche  de  Brabant,  etc.  Here  is  a  passage  from  it:  "The 
greatest  diversity,  uncertainty,  and  arbitrariness  reigned  in 
all  the  proceedings.  The  accused  was  deprived  of  the  pre- 
cious guarantee  of  a  public  trial;  the  judge  could,  if  he  chose, 
refuse  counsel  to  the  defendant,  nor  was  the  latter  allowed 
to  be  present  during  the  examination  of  witnesses."    The 

*The  enemies  of  the  Inquisition  rely  chiefly  upon  the  testimony 
of  Llorente.  To  be  convinced  of  the  little  reliance  to  be  placed  on 
this  writer  it  is  sufficient  to  know  that  he  destroyed  the  original 
documents  upon  which  he  claimed  to  have  based  his  work,  hoping  thus 
to  render  it  impossible  to  control  or  confute  his  assertions.  See  Stone, 
A  Brief  for  the  Spanish  Inquisition;  Balmes,  p.  456. 

'  See  Hefele's  Life  of  Cardinal  Ximenes,  which  contains  much  that 
is  interesting  in  regard  to  the  Inquisition  of  Spain. 


CERTAIN    ACCUSATIONS   AGAINST   THE    CHURCH.  483 

same  writer,  speaking  of  the  penalties,  says:  ''The  general 
system  breathed  only  intimidation  and  public  vengeance. 
The  penalty  of  death  was  frequently  accompanied  with  a 
series  of  revolting  cruelties,  the  judges  endeavoring  to  grad- 
uate capital  punishment  according  to  the  various  degrees 
of  guilt  in  the  delinquent.  Below  capital  punishment 
there  were  only  corporal  punishments,  frequently  irreparable, 
always  degrading.  Nothing  was  done  to  reform  the  crim- 
inal or  to  inspire  him  with  better  sentiments  before  returning 
him  to  social  life.  Detention  was  used  only  as  a  punish- 
ment and  for  slight  offences.  It  had  no  place  in  the  penal 
system,  properly  speaking,  and  was  never  inflicted  when 
the  judge  had  to  repress  a  really  grave  violation  or  offence." 

What  is  said  here  of  the  criminal  laws  of  Brabant  appHes  to 
the  rest  of  Europe.  It  was  a  time  when  counterfeiters  were 
burned  ahve,  when  those  who  used  false  weights  and  measures 
were  scourged  with  rods  or  condemned  to  death;  burglary 
led  to  the  gallows ;  those  convicted  a  second  time  of  theft  were 
also  punished  with  death.  To  form  an  idea  of  the  excessive 
severity  of  the  civil  tribunals  of  that  period  it  is  sufficient  to 
read  the  Caroline  Penal  Code  of  Charles  V.,  which  governed 
the  German  empire  until  the  last  century. 

Fourth  Remark. — The  use  of  torture  is  made  an  accusa- 
tion against  the  Inquisition.  Who  does  not  know  that 
torture  was  used  in  all  the  tribunals  of  Europe  as  a  means  of 
discovering  the  truth? 

There  is  a  curious  incident  relative  to  this  in  the  memoir 
of  M.  Poullet.  He  says  that  in  1765  and  1766  the  Belgian 
Council  were  consulted  by  Charles  de  Lorraine  concerning 
certain  reforms  to  be  made  in  the  Criminal  Code,  notably 
the  eventual  abolition  of  torture.  The  whole  Council  voted 
for  preserving  it,  and  on  being  consulted  again,  a  few  years 
later,  maintained  their  first  opinion. 

Let  us  observe  also  that  the  Inquisition  abandoned  the 
use  of  torture  before  the  other  tribunals  of  Europe.  "  It  is 
certain,"  says Llorente,  "that  the  Inquisition  had  long  ceased 


484  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

to  use  torture."  Moreover,  contrary  to  the  custom  of  all 
civil  tribunals,  it  never  permitted  torture  to  be  used  a  second 
time  during  the  same  trial,  and  it  required  that  a  physician 
be  present  to  determine  the  moment  when  the  hfe  of  a 
criminal  was  in  danger. 

Fifth  Remark. — In  regard  to  the  Spanish  Inquisition  in 
particular,  we  have  no  difficulty  in  recognizing  that  there 
were  abuses.  How  could  it  be  otherwise  when  here,  as 
elsewhere,  men  were  judges?  At  the  same  time  it  is  im- 
portant to  bear  in  mind  that: 

a.  The  tribunal  was  more  an  institution  of  the  State  than 
of  the  Church,  and  its  members  followed,  not  the  instructions 
of  the  popes,  but  the  prescriptions  of  temporal  princes.  As 
to  the  abuses  with  which  it  may  be  lawfully  charged,  the 
Church  was  the  first  to  condemn  them.  The  popes  pro- 
tested against  excessive  severity,  and  they  even  went  so  far  as 
to  grant  those  condenmed  by  the  royal  tribunal  the  right  of 
appealing  to  a  special  ecclesiastical  judge.  Later,  finding 
that  the  royal  judges  did  not  respect  this  right  of  appeal,  the 
sovereign  Pontiff  granted  all  condemned  the  right  to  claim 
the  interference  of  the  Holy  See.  Spanish  inquisitors  were 
even  excommunicated  despite  the  wrath  of  princes. 

In  a  word,  the  Church  used  every  influence  in  her  power 
to  induce  rulers  and  judges  to  imitate  the  example  of  her 
gentleness  and  moderation.  Therefore  nothing  is  more 
unjust  and  unreasonable  than  to  hold  the  Papacy  or  the 
Church  responsible  for  excesses  committed  by  the  Spanish 
tribunals. 

h.  It  has  been  proved  that  the  cruelties  attributed  to  the 
Spanish  Inquisition  have  been  exaggerated  beyond  measure 
and  with  signal  bad  faith.  Llorente  himself,  though  so  hostile 
to  the  Church,  acknowledges  that  the  dungeons  of  the  In- 
quisition were  dry,  high-vaulted  apartments,  palaces  in  fact, 
compared  with  the  prisons  of  the  other  tribunals  of  Europe; 
and  that  no  prisoner  of  the  Inquisition  ever  wore  chains  or  an 
iron  collar.     M.  Bourgoing,  ambassador  to  Spain,  does  not 


CERTAIN   ACCUSATIONS  AGAINST  THE   CHURCH.  485 

hesitate  to  say,  in  his  Tableau  de  VEspagne  moderne:  "I 
acknowledge,  in  justice  to  truth,  that  the  Inquisition  might 
be  cited  at  the  present  day  as  a  model  of  equity." 

c.  But  there  is  nothing  which  inspires  the  ill-instructed 
with  greater  horror  than  the  thought  of  the  autos  da  je. 
They  are  usually  represented  as  horrible  scenes:  a  huge 
caldron  large  enough  to  burn  a  multitude  of  victims,  sur- 
rounded by  a  crowd  of  fanatics,  among  whom  figure  promi- 
nently the  implacable  judges  of  the  Holy  Office,  contemplat- 
ing with  fierce  joy  a  spectacle  worthy  of  cannibals. 

The  truth  is  an  auto  da  fe,  that  is,  an  ax^t  of  faith,  did  not 
consist  in  burning  or  putting  to  death,  but  in  acquitting 
persons  falsely  accused,  or  reconciled  with  the  Church. 
In  fact  this  tribunal,  like  the  tribunal  of  penance,  absolved 
the  repentant.  Only  obstinate  heretics,  as  weU  as  those 
whose  offences  were  partly  of  a  civil  character,  were  handed 
over  to  the  secular  arm.  After  this  absolution  the  auto  da 
fe  was  finished  and  the  ecclesiastical  judge  withdrew. 

d.  It  is  frequently  alleged  that  the  number  of  victims 
immolated  in  a  brief  period  by  the  Spanish  Inquisition  may 
be  estimated  by  hundreds  of  thousands ;  now  a  fist  furnished 
by  this  same  Llorente  estimates  the  number  of  victims 
during  the  three  hundred  and  thirty-one  years  of  the  In- 
quisition at  about  thirty-five  thousand,  and  this  list  includes 
criminals  of  various  categories,  who  were  also  amenable  to 
these  tribunals;  for  example,  smugglers,  magicians  or  sor- 
cerers, usurers;  and  even  then  the  fist  is  manifestly  ex- 
aggerated; for  if  Llorente  is  to  be  believed,  in  regard  to  the 
autos  da  fe  of  Toledo  of  February  12th,  May  1st,  and  De- 
cember 10th,  1486,  the  number  of  victims  was  respectively 
seven  hundred,  nine  hundred,  and  seven  hundred  and  fifty, 
but  in  reahty  there  was  not  in  this  number  a  single  victim: 
it  is  a  list  of  criminals,  not  of  executions.^ 

^  Let  us  add  a  word  in  comparison  with  what  was  taking  place  at 
the  same  time  in  Protestant  countries.  At  Nuremberg,  one  of  the 
most  enlightened  cities  of  Germany,  of  the  50,000  souls  who  formed 


486  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

Comparing  the  much-decried  severity  of  the  Spanish 
Inquisition  with  the  cruelty  of  Ehzabeth  of  England,  Wilham 
Cobbett,  a  Protestant  author,  affirms  that  this  sanguinary 
queen  put  more  persons  to  death  in  one  year  than  the  In- 
quisition did  during  the  whole  period  of  its  existence.  More- 
over, we  have  seen  that  the  intolerance  of  Protestants 
toward  Cathohcs  was  everywhere  much  more  violent  than 
that  of  Cathohcs  toward  heretics;  the  Lutheran  princes 
tore  their  subjects  from  the  Church  by  a  hloody  persecution. 
And  yet  it  is  only  against  the  CathoHc  Church  that  the 
charge  of  persecution  is  made. 

Sixth  Remark. — It  is  just  to  judge  the  tree  by  its  fruit, 
and  to  meet  the  charges  against  the  Inquisition  with  the 
salutary  results  it  produced.  It  cannot  be  disputed  that 
it  was  owing  in  a  great  measure  to  this  institution  that 
many  of  the  countries  of  Europe  preserved  the  faith  intact 
during  centuries,  and  were  preserved  particularly  from  the 
baneful  invasion  of  intolerant  and  sanguinary  Protestantism. 

Spain,  particularly,  owes  the  Inquisition  a  large  debt  of 
gratitude  for  the  preservation  of  unity  of  faith,  and  for  pre- 
serving the  country  from  the  civil  wars  which  devastated 
so  many  other  countries.  Even  Voltaire,  the  great  enemy 
of  the  Inquisition  as  well  as  of  the  Church,  says:  ''In  Spain 
during  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries  there  were 

the  judiciary  district,  356  perished  on  the  scaffold  in  forty  years 
(1577-1617).  To  keep  pace  with  this  the  Spanish  Inquisition  would 
have  had  to  execute  56,960  persons  in  the  same  period  of  time.  At 
Nordlingen,  which  counted  6000  inhabitants,  35  sorcerers  were 
burned  in  four  years  (1590-1594).  If  the  Inquisition  had  exercised 
the  same  rigor,  it  would  have  burned  during  the  same  lapse  of  time 
46,500  sorcerers,  that  is,  11,000  more  than  the  total  number  of  those 
who,  condemned  for  all  kinds  of  crimes,  received  capital  punishment 
during  the  whole  time  of  its  existence.  This  was  the  alleged  excep- 
tional rigor  of  the  Spanish  Inquisition.  (On  the  famous  trials  for 
Witchcraft  see  Hergenrother,  Ch.  and  St.,  ii.,  Essay  16,  p.  2;  D.  R. 
xxx.  331;  Birkhauser,  Ch.  Hist.,  pp.  473,  722,  note;  Parsons,  vi.  534; 
Spalding,  M.  J.,  Miscell.,  I.,  ch.  20;  M.,  July  1902;  U.  B.,  July  1896, 
p.  361;  A.  C.  Q.,  July  1902. 


CERTAIN   ACCUSATIONS   AGAINST   THE    CHURCH.  487 

none  of  those  bloody  revolutions,  those  conspiracies,  and 
those  cruel  punishments  which  were  witnessed  in  the  other 
courts  of  Europe.  .  .  .  Ejngs  were  not  assassinated  as  in 
France,  and  did  not  perish  by  the  hand  of  the  executioner 
as  in  England."  ''Look,"  says  Joseph  de  Maistre,  "at  the 
Thirty  Years'  War  enkindled  by  the  arguments  of  Luther, 
the  unheard-of  excesses  of  the  Anabaptists  and  the  Peas- 
ants; the  civil  wars  of  France,  England,  and  Flanders;  the 
massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew,  the  massacre  of  Merindol 
and  of  Cevennes;  the  assassination  of  Mary  Stuart,  Henry 
III.,  Henry  IV.,  Charles  I.,  Prince  of  Orange,  etc.  The 
blood  shed  by  the  reformers  would  float  a  vessel.  The 
Inquisition,  at  most,  shed  only  the  blood  of  these  murderers. 
They  need  not  tell  us,  therefore,  that  the  Inquisition  pro- 
duced this  abuse  and  that  abuse;  for  that  is  not  the  ques- 
tion, but  rather  whether,  during  the  last  three  centuries, 
Spain,  in  virtue  of  the  Inquisition,  did  not  enjoy  more  peace 
and  happiness  than  the  other  countries  of  Europe." 

''The  Inquisition  has  been  reproached,"  says  the  same 
writer,  "with  its  darkening  influence  on  the  human  mind, 
but  the  finest  period  of  Spanish  hterature  was  the  reign  of 
Philip  11.  .  .  .  It  is  vain  to  reiterate  that  genius  is  chained 
when  forbidden  to  attack  national  dogmas;  error  can  never 
be  estabhshed  by  force  of  repetition."^ 

Seventh  Remark. — We  would  make  a  final  remark  to 
calm  the  vain  terrors  which  certain  men  hke  to  excite. 
Though  the  Church,  as  we  have  seen,  has  an  incontestable 
right  to  punish  heretics,  though  she  used  this  right  when 
she  judged  it  fitting,  yet  she  is  not  obliged  to  use  it  always, 
she  must  even  renounce  the  exercise  of  it  when  it  becomes 
impossible  or  injurious.  Thus  the  Church  has  in  reality 
long  since  abandoned  it,  and  the  Inquisition  remains  only 
as  a  historical  memory  and  a  bugbear  in  the  service  of  igno- 
rance and  impiety.  Those  who  affect  to  tremble  at  the 
recollection  of  it  have  no  reason  to  fear.  The  secular  arm 
*  Robinson,  W.  C,  Philip  II.  and  his  Vindication. 


4S8  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

is  not  suspended  by  the  Church  above  their  heads.  Would 
to  Heaven  CathoHcs  were  equally  secure  from  the  blows  of 
a  secular  arm  of  scant  tolerance! 


ART.  III.— THE  TRIAL  OF  GALILEO.* 

This  is  another  weapon  of  attack  valued  by  the  enemies 
of  the  Church,  for  the  reason  that,  in  their  opinion,  it  proves 
the  fallibility  of  the  Church  and  the  Pope,  and  their  opposi- 
tion to  scientific  progress.  Let  us  see  if  the  accusation  is 
well  founded. 

Historical  Notice. — Galileo  (1564-1642), a  learned  astron- 
omer and  distinguished  philosopher,  was  born  at  Pisa,  but 
Hved  at  Florence.  He  adopted  at  the  beginning  of  the 
sixteenth  century  the  opinion  of  the  Canon  Copernicus 
(1473-1543),  which  held  that  the  earth  moved  around  a 
stationary  sun.  But  while  Copernicus  was  allowed  to  teach 
his  theory  undisturbed,  Galileo  was  indirectly  censured  the 
24th  of  February,  1616,  by  the  Holy  Office. 

No  book  of  Galileo  is  condemned  in  this  censure  pro- 
nounced by  the  Holy  Office,  but  the  Copernican  doctrine 
in  regard  to  the  mobility  of  the  earth  and  the  immobility 
of  the  sun  is  declared  to  be  philosophically  false,  contrary  to 
the  teaching  of  Holy  Scripture,  and  formally  heretical.  This 
censure  was  an  act  of  a  private  nature  in  which  no  one  but 
the  consultors  of  the  Roman  Congregation  were  concerned. 
Therefore  it  excited  no  discussion.  The  following  Thursday 
the  Pope,  on  the  report  of  the  Cardinals  of  the  Holy  Office, 
ordered  that  Galileo  be  notified  of  this  censure  and  that 
he  be  forbidden  to  teach  the  doctrine  of  the  mobility  of 
the  earth.  The  order  contains  no  word  of  Paul  V.  which 
could  be  construed  as  qualifying  the  doctrme;  moreover, 
this  again  was  merely  a  personal  document  having  nothing 

*  Wegg-Prosser ;  Parsons,  Studies,  IV.;  Lies,  p.  80;  A.  C.  Q.  vi.  85; 
C.  W.  viii.,  xlvi.  110;  D.  R.  New  Ser.  xvi.  351,  xvii.  140,  III.  Ser.  ii. 
236;  I.  E.  R.,  Apr.  1900. 


CERTAIN  ACCUSATIONS  AGAINST  THE   CHURCH.  489 

in  common  with  an  ex  cathedra  definition.  Then  followed 
the  decree  of  the  Index  of  March  5,  1616,  which  prohibited 
the  hooks  written  in  favor  of  the  system  of  Copernicus.  The 
Pope's  name  does  not  appear  in  the  decree:  the  Congrega- 
tion spoke  in  its  own  name.  No  penance  or  abjuration 
followed  on  the  part  of  Galileo,  who  continued  to  live  in 
his  villa  near  Florence,  enjoying  the  friendship  and  favors 
of  Urban  VIII.  Finally,  in  1633  a  sentence  was  issued 
condemning  Galileo  to  retract  what  were  called  his  errors. 
It  simply  stated  the  culpability  of  Galileo  and  fixed  the 
penalties  he  was  to  endure.  The  decree  of  1616  was  re- 
ferred to  only  as  an  historical  fact.  ''The  Sacred  Congre- 
gation of  the  Index,"  it  ran,  ''has  rendered  a  decree  in  which 
the  books  which  treat  of  this  doctrine  were  prohibited,  and 
the  doctrine  itself  declared  false  and  contrary  to  the  Scrip- 
tures.'' There  is  no  trace  in  it  of  the  public  intervention 
of  the  sovereign  Pontiff,  either  in  qualifying  as  heretical 
the  heresy  attributed  to  the  Copernican  system,  or  in  the 
examination  and  condemnation  of  Galileo. 

We  see  even  from  this  brief  statement  of  the  case  that 
the  only  important  decree  from  a  doctrinal  point  of  view  is 
that  of  March  5,  1616,  which  attributes  to  the  words  of  the 
Bible  a  meaning  which  we  know  now  the  text  does  not  bear 
out.    What  are  we  to  think  of  this  decree? 

I.  The  Decree  of  1616  and  the  Infallibility  op 
THE  Church. 

This  question  is  as  simple  as  it  is  incontestable:  the 
decree  of  1616  is  not  one  of  those  sentences  to  which  the 
Church  attributes  the  privilege  of  infallibihty.     In  effect: 

1.  We  have  already  seen  (p.  409)  what  conditions  are 
necessary  to  render  the  doctrinal  teaching  of  the  sover- 
eign Pontiff  infallible:  he  must  speak  ex  cathedra,  that  is, 
in  the  discharge  of  his  office  as  pastor  and  doctor 
of  all  Christians  he  must  define,  in  virtue  of  his  supreme 


490  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

apostolic  authority,  that  a  doctrine  concerning  faith  or 
morals  is  to  be  believed  by  the  whole  Church.  Now,  the  in- 
criminating decree  of  1616  lacks  the  characters  required 
by  the  Vatican  Council:  it  imposes  no  adherence  to  any 
doctrine,  it  merely  prohibits  the  hooks  which  teach  the  mobility 
of  the  earth  and  the  immobility  of  the  sun;  nor  does  it  in- 
sist that  the  last  opinion  shall  be  held  as  false  and  the  first 
as  true.  It  prescribes  what  must  be  done,  not  what  must 
be  believed.  In  brief,  no  doctrine  is  imposed  as  of  faith 
upon  the  whole  Church;  it  is  only  a  disciplinary  enactment 
to  prevent  the  spread  of  certain  books.  It  is  true  that  the 
considerations  which  precede  the  decree  and  which  express 
the  motive  dictating  it,  contain  a  doctrinal  error;  in  effect 
the  theory  of  the  movement  of  the  earth  is  neither  false  nor 
contrary  to  Holy  Scripture;  but  the  decision  itself  does  not 
go  beyond  a  disciplinary  enactment.  Therefore,  even  if  the 
decree  of  1616  contained  an  infallible  definition  of  doctrine, 
the  considerations,  as  we  have  seen  (ibid.),  would  not  neces- 
sarily partake  of  this  infallibility. 

2.  To  this  decisive  proof  let  us  add  that  the  very  form 
of  the  decree  fully  confirms  what  we  say.  In  all  the  doc- 
trinal definitions  emanating  from  the  Holy  See  and  recog- 
nized as  infallible,  the  Pope  always  teaches  directly  and 
not  through  the  cardinals.  There  is  not  a  single  example 
of  a  doctrinal  definition  generally  recognized  as  infallible 
which  was  rendered  in  the  form  of  the  decree  concerning 
Galileo. 

3.  Still  another  argument  of  great  value  is  that  contem- 
porary documents  prove  that  the  Pope  himself  and  the 
persons  of  his  court  never  considered  the  decree  in  question 
an  infallible  definition.  Nor  did  the  theologians  of  the  time 
or  those  who  followed  them:  not  one  can  be  cited  who  re- 
garded this  decree  as  definitive  and  infallible;  a  number, 
on  the  contrary,  could  be  named  who  categoricall}^  declared 
the  contrary.  Their  names  and  their  statements  can  be 
found  in  the  works  or  articles  referred  to,  especially  Wegg- 


CERTAIN   ACCUSATIONS   AGAINST  THE   CHURCH.  491 

Prosser  and  Parsons.  Finally,  the  idea  of  regarding  the  decree 
as  an  ex  cathedra  definition  never  occurred  even  to  Galileo's 
bitterest  opponents,  though  such  a  definition  would  have 
afforded  them  the  best  means  of  dealing  a  decisive  blow  to 
his  theories. 

Remarks. — 1st.  We  have  no  difficulty  in  acknowledging 
that  the  Roman  Congregation  erred  in  their  much-to-be- 
regretted  condemnation  of  Galileo;  carried  away  by  their 
extravagant  fondness  for  Aristotle  and  the  philosophic  sys- 
tem of  his  commentators,  they  made  the  mistake  of  imag- 
ining that  religion  was  endangered  and  Holy  Scripture  con- 
tradicted by  the  system  of  Copernicus. 

It  is  also  true  that  Pope  Urban  VII.  himself  took  an  active 
part  in  this  erroneous  judgment;  but  his  responsibility  is 
wholly  individual,  wholly  personal:  it  tells  against  the 
scholar,  the  private  theologian,  but  not  against  the  sov- 
ereign Pontiff  speaking  ex  cathedra,  that  is,  as  sovereign 
teacher  of  the  universal  Church.  In  fact  all  that  theology 
requires  to  constitute  an  ex  cathedra  decree  is  altogether 
lacking  here :  the  Pope  not  only  made  no  solemn  declaration, 
but  no  bull,  no  encyclical,  nor  even  a  brief  of  the  Holy  Father 
accompanied  the  sentence  of  the  Holy  Office  of  the  Congre- 
gation of  the  Index;  nor  was  any  confirmation  or  signature 
asked  of  the  sovereign  Pontiff.  And  even  such  confirma- 
tion would  not  be  sufficient  to  pledge  his  infalfibihty. 

2d.  Though  the  system  of  Copernicus  was  true,  Gahleo 
did  not  know  how  to  defend  it,  and  it  is  not  astonishing  that 
the  weak  arguments  with  which  he  tried  to  estabhsh  his 
theory  excited  violent  contradiction.  Moreover,  if  eccle- 
siastical tribunals  were  deceived,  scholars  could  not  boast 
of  greater  perspicacity,  for  numbers  of  them  fell  into  the 
same  error,  and,  what  is  more,  desired  and  urged  the  con- 
demnation of  Galileo.  Hence  science  was  no  less  at  fault 
than  theology.  We  might  add  that  Luther,  Melanchthon, 
and  the  reformers  generally  showed  no  more  tolerance  for 
the  new  system. 


492  CHRISTIAN    APOLOGETICS. 

3d.  If  Galileo  after  his  condemnation  of  1616  had  been  more 
prudent  and  less  aggressive/  he  would  not  have  received  a 
second  condemnation  in  1633,  and  it  is  probable  that  the 
system  of  Copernicus  would  soon  have  become  popular, 
for  it  had  as  partisans  and  defenders  among  the  clergy  a 
number  of  renowned  scholars.  Unfortunately  he  had  not 
patience  to  trust  the  inevitable  triumph  of  his  ideas  to  time, 
and  he  wrote  a  new  work  entitled  '' Dialogues  on  the  Two 
Systems  of  the  World, "  in  which  he  attacked  those  among 
his  adversaries  who  had  been  most  indulgent  toward  him. 
The  Pope,  particularly,  believed  himself  insulted  in  the 
ridiculous  character  of  Simplicio.  The  partisans  of  the 
Ptolemaic  system,  incensed  by  Galileo's  conduct,  asked  and 
obtained  a  new  condemnation,  which,  however,  did  not 
receive,  any  more  than  that  of  1616,  the  authentic  or  public 
confirmation  of  the  sovereign  Pontiff. 

4th.  No  Cathohc  attributes  the  privilege  of  infahibihty  to 
the  Roman  Congregations.  They  are  subject  to  err,  no 
doubt;  but  this  is  not  to  say  that  they  have  no  authority 
and  that  their  decrees  may  be  defied.  The  father  of  a  family 
also  may  be  mistaken,  but  he  does  not  on  that  account  lose 
his  right  to  the  obedience  of  his  children.  Instituted  to 
examine  doctrinal  questions,  and  to  watch  over  the  purity 
of  the  faith,  these  congregations  have  the  right  to  forbid 
the  teaching  of  certain  doctrines  considered  by  them  as 
erroneous,  suspicious,  or  dangerous.  Such  prohibition  is 
a  measure  of  prudence,  and  is  binding  upon  Catholics;  at 
the  same  time  it  is  essentially  provisory  in  its  nature.  If, 
therefore,  it  is  proved  later  that  the  danger  does  not  exist, 
or  that  it  has  ceased,  the  prohibition  will  be  removed,  or 
cease  of  itself  to  exist  for  lack  of  cause. 

Conclusion. — It  is  manifestly  evident  from  the  facts  stated 

above  that  the  infallibility  of  the  Church  does  not  enter  into 

the  questions  of  Galileo's  condemnation;    we  have  reason, 

on  the  contrary,  to  recognize  in  it  the  providential  assistance 

*  Dr.  Whewell,  History  of  Inductive  Science,  vol.  i.,  p.  420. 


CERTAIN  ACCUSATIONS  AGAINST  THE  CHURCH.      493 

promised  to  the  Church,  when  we  consider  that  though  nu- 
merous theologians  and  possibly  the  Pope  himself  regarded 
the  Copernican  system  as  contrary  to  the  Holy  Scripture, 
God  did  not  permit  the  head  of  the  Church  to  pronounce 
against  it  a  judgment  ex  cathedra. 


II.   Was  Galileo  a  Martyr  to  Science? 

This  second  point  is  much  less  important  than  the  first. 
It  implies  both  a  question  of  principle  and  one  of  fact:  is 
the  Church  opposed  to  science,  and  did  Galileo  have  to  suffer 
for  his  scientific  conviction  ? 

1.  So  far  from  being  opposed  to  the  progress  of  science, 
the  Church  has  always  stimulated  intellectual  activity; 
she  has  always  favored  philosophy,  belles-lettres,  the  sciences, 
and  the  arts.  This  we  have  already  proved,  and  we  dem- 
onstrate it  still  further  in  Chapter  V. 

In  regard  to  the  systematic  and  malicious  opposition  to 
the  progress  of  natural  science  attributed  to  the  clergy  at  the 
time  of  Galileo,  it  is  clearly  denied  by  the  striking  testimony 
of  the  sympathy  and  protection  then  accorded  to  scientific 
studies  at  Rome;  by  the  remarkable  labors  of  the  Jesuits 
Clavius,  Griemberger,  Guldin,  Scheiner,  Grimaldi,  Riccioli; 
of  the  canons  or  monks,  hke  Copernicus,  Castelli,  Renieri, 
Cavaheri,  Gassendi,  and  by  the  enthusiastic  reception  which 
the  discoveries  of  Galileo  met  with  in  the  highest  circles 
of  Rome ;  by  his  intimacy  and  active  correspondence  with  a 
number  of  prelates  such  as  Cardinals  Barberini  and  Conti, 
Mgr.  Dini,  Mgr.  Ciampoli,  the  Archbishop  Piccolomini, 
Mgr.  Virginio  Cesarini. 

Morover,  the  system  of  Aristarchus  of  Samos  (third  century 
before  Christ),  which  held  that  the  earth  revolved  about  the 
sun,  was  freely  taught  without  any  protest  on  the  part  of  the 
Church.  In  1435  Cardinal  Cusa  revived  this  system;  then 
Canon  Copernicus  in  his  immortal  work  Be  orbium  codestium 


494  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

revolutionihus  had  completely  transformed  it  and  applied  it  to 
the  discussion  of  heavenly  appearances;  his  work  had  ob- 
tained the  support  of  Cardinal  Schomberg  and  the  approba- 
tion of  Pope  Paul  III. ;  the  new  doctrine  was  taught  in  the 
Italian  schools  and  professed  before  the  sovereign  Pontiff 
Clement  VII.,  and  no  authorized  protest  was  ever  heard 
within  the  Church. 

2.  To  stimulate  the  hatred  of  the  opponents  of  religion 
an  attempt  has  been  made  to  represent  Galileo  as  a  martyr  to 
science,  thrust  into  a  dark  dungeon  and  delivered  up  to  the 
horrors  of  torture.  The  truth  is  that  from  1616  to  1633  he 
peacefully  continued  his  labors  at  Florence,  where  he  wrote 
the  works  we  have  mentioned.  In  regard  to  the  period  of 
the  second  trial,  it  was  proved  by  the  testimony  of  all  con- 
temporaries most  worthy  of  belief,  as  well  as  by  the  cor- 
respondence of  Gahleo  himself,  and  the  written  proceedings 
of  the  trial  of  1633,  that  he  not  only  was  not  tortured  and 
was  not  a  martyr  to  science,  but  that,  strictly  speaking,  he 
was  never  imprisoned  or  deprived  of  his  liberty  either 
before  or  after  his  sentence.  ''We  defy  the  most  fanatical," 
says  M.  Gilbert  in  La  Revue  des  Questions  scienti^ques  (1877), 
''to  state  when  and  where,  during  or  after  his  trial,  Gahleo 
endured  an  hour's  detention  in  a  real  prison."  While  his 
trial  was  pending  he  Hved  at  the  palace  of  Nicohni,  the  Tuscan 
ambassador,  his  devoted  friend,  who  overwhelmed  him  with 
attention ;  on  the  eve  of  his  examination  he  was  taken  to  the 
Minerva,  where  he  remained  from  the  12th  to  the  13th  of  April, 
1633,  in  the  apartments  of  the  judge-advocate  of  the  Holy 
Office,  with  permission  "to  wander  in  the  vast  chambers," 
as  Gahleo  himself  writes,  and  had  the  services  not  only 
of  his  own  servant,  but  of  those  of  the  ambassador.  "As  to 
my  health,  I  am  well,  thanks  to  God  and  the  deUcate  atten- 
tion of  the  ambassador  and  his  wife,  who  are  most  attentive 
in  affording  me  every  comfort."  Having  fallen  ill,  he  was 
sent  back  by  order  of  Pope  Urban  VIII.  to  the  palace  of  the 
ambassador,   where  he  was  allowed  to  receive  his  friends, 


CERTAIN   ACCUSATIONS    AGAINST   THE    CHURCH.  495 

and  to  go  and  come  as  he  pleased.  He  remained  in  this 
brilliant  prison  until  June  22d,  the  day  of  his  condemnation. 
By  the  judicial  sentence  he  was  to  be  detained  at  the  apart- 
ments of  the  fiscal  of  the  Holy  Office ;  but  the  next  day  this 
detention  was  changed  to  retirement  at  the  palace  of  the 
Grand  Duke  of  Tuscany.  Later,  after  a  sojourn  with  his 
devoted  friend  the  Archbishop  of  Sienna,  Gahleo  passed  the 
rest  of  his  Hfe  at  his  own  villa  at  Arcetri,  which  had  been 
assigned  him  for  his  permanent  residence.  Here  he  con- 
tinued his  scientific  work  and  received  the  visits  of  the 
learned  and  prominent  persons  of  his  time.  He  died  in 
1642,  having  drawn  to  the  last  day  of  his  hfe  the  pension 
allowed  him  by  the  Pope  in  1630. 

3.  In  regard  to  the  torture  which,  it  is  claimed,  was  in- 
fficted  upon  the  illustrious  astronomer,  no  confirmation  of  it 
is  found  in  the  authentic  and  complete  records  published 
by  M.  de  TEpinois,  which  give  the  fullest  details  of  the 
trial.  ''Never  did  Gahleo  in  letters  to  his  most  intimate 
correspondents  ever  write  a  line  from  which  it  could  be 
inferred  that  he  was  subjected  to  torture.  It  is  true  that 
in  his  final  examination  the  learned  Florentine  was  menaced 
with  torture,  but  it  is  equally  certain  that  the  menace  was, 
and  could  be,  only  a  mere  formahty."  The  inquisitorial 
proceeding  did  not  allow  the  actual  use  of  the  torture  in 
the  case  of  old  men  and  the  sick.  Now  Gahleo  was  sixty- 
nine  years  old  and  suffering  from  grave  sickness.  He 
himself  declares  in  a  letter  of  1634  that ' '  he  suffered  nothing 
in  his  hfe  or  honor."  See  M.  Gilbert's  article  already 
quoted. 

It  was  only  about  1770,  that  is,  one  hundred  and  forty  years 
after  the  trial,  that  Itahan  writers  began  to  circulate  the 
report  that  Gahleo  was  put  to  the  torture,  acknowledging 
at  the  same  time  that  it  was  improbable.  Now  that  we 
possess  the  official  documents  of  the  trial,  such  a  calumny 
is  absolutely  untenable;  hence  it  is  never  cited  by  reliable 
writers,   whatever  the  school  to  which  they  belong.     We 


496  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

cannot  hope,  however,  to  see  it  disappear  from  the  writings 
hostile  to  rehgion.^ 

Let  us  observe  in  passing  that  the  famous  e  pur  si  muove, 
''nevertheless  it  moves,"  attributed  to  Galileo  as  he  rose 
from  his  knees  after  his  abjuration,  is  a  pure  invention.  For 
the  rest  this  story  began  to  circulate  only  at  the  end  of  the 
last  century.  Writers  will  continue  nevertheless  to  quote 
it  as  true,  because  of  its  fine  effect  in  a  romance  or  play. 

Conclusion. — The  enemies  of  the  Church  must  be  very 
poor  in  arguments  against  her  to  repeat  constantly  this  oft- 
refuted  error  of  an  ecclesiastic  tribunal.  The  error,  unique  in 
its  kind,  was  shared  by  a  number  of  scholars,  and  is  readily 
explained  by  the  circumstances  of  the  times  in  which  it 
occurred.  Their  persistent  use  of  this  question,  more  than 
two  hundred  years  old,  as  a  powerful  weapon  against  the 
Church,  is  all  the  more  singular  since  Gahleo  himself,  to 
whose  opinion  a  number  of  cardinals  and  priests  rallied, 
was  not  an  apostate,  not  a  free-thinker,  but  a  sincere  and 
honest  Catholic;  the  rudest  trials  failed  to  shake  his  faith, 
and  he  died  piously  in  the  bosom  of  the  Catholic  Church. 

ART.  IV.— THE    MASSACRE    OF   ST.  BARTHOLOMEW   AND 
THE  REVOCATION  OF  THE  EDICT  OF  NANTES. 

1.  Historical  Notice. — In  1572,  on  the  eve  of  the  feast 
of  St.  Bartholomew,^  Charles  IX.,  yielding  to  the  insistence 
of  Catharine  de  Medici,  his  mother,  gave  order  for  the 
massacre  of  Admiral  Cohgny  and  the  other  Huguenot 
leaders  hving  in  Paris  or  who  had  recently  come  to  assist 
at  the  marriage  of  the  King  of  Navarre  with  Margaret  of 
Valois.    The  populace  of  Paris  had  long  regarded  the  Hu- 

*  On  Giordano  Bruno,  another  so-called  martyr  of  science,  see 
J.  Mooney,  Who  was  G.  B.?;  A.  C.  Q.  xiv.  716;  k.  Ixvi.  357,  Ixxv. 
527;  Parsons,  Studies,  III.,  ch.  31;  Lies,  p.  33. 

2  Parsons,  Lies,  p.  221;  Studies, III., ch.  23;  Laughnan,  S.J.  (C.  T.  S. 
xvii.,  XX.);  C.  W.  viii.,  xli.  813,  xlii.  254;  M.  Ixxvii.  175;  D.  R. 
New  Ser.  iv.  281. 


CERTAIN   ACCUSATIONS  AGAINST  THE   CHURCH.  497 

guenots  with  hatred;  they  had  not  forgotten  the  promise 
of  the  pillage  of  the  capital  made  by  the  reformers  to  the 
crafty  followers  recruited  in  Germany.  Thus,  when  excited 
by  the  sight  of  the  blood  shed  on  this  memorable  night  by 
the  emissaries  of  the  king,  they  rose  in  their  turn,  and  venting 
their  rage  upon  the  Protestants,  put  them  to  the  sword  before 
any  authority  could  quell  their  violence  or  arrest  the  carnage. 
From  the  25th  of  August  to  the  30th  of  October  similar 
massacres  took  place  in  several  other  cities  of  the  kingdom. 

We  have  no  need  to  examine  this  event  here  from  a  his- 
torical point  of  view.  We  shall  find  it  most  carefully  treated 
in  M.  Kervyn's  beautiful  work,  Les  Huguenots  et  les  Gueux. 
The  minute  researches  of  this  historian,  who  advances  noth- 
ing which  is  not  supported  by  authentic  documents,  throws 
great  Hght  on  this  terrible  drama.  Our  duty  is  to  demon- 
strate that  there  is  not  the  shadow  of  foundation  for  hold- 
ing religion  responsible  for  this  event.  If  there  ever  was 
anything  clearly  demonstrated  by  the  most  incontestable 
documents,  it  is  that  the  St.  Bartholomew  massacre  was  a 
purely  political  event ;  religion  had  no  part  in  it,  neither  was 
it  the  agent  or  pretext,  nor  did  it  counsel  it.  No  cardinal, 
no  bishop,  no  priest  took  part  in  the  dehberations  concerning 
the  massacre,  any  more  than  in  its  execution. 

It  is  true  that  at  the  news  of  this  terrible  stroke  of  state 
policy  Gregory  XIII.  had  solemn  thanksgiving  offered  to 
God,  went  in  procession  to  the  churches  of  St.  Mark  and 
St.  Louis,  and  had  a  medal  struck  commemorative  of  the 
occasion.  But  we  know  what  was  the  real  and  only  object 
of  this  demonstration :  the  court  of  Valois  sent  word  to  the 
Pope  that  a  terrible  conspiracy  against  the  throne  had  been 
happily  discovered  and  frustrated.  Similar  notices  were 
sent  to  the  provinces  of  the  kingdom  and  to  all  the  Christian 
courts.  Later,  when  the  whole  truth  was  known,  the  sov- 
ereign Pontiff  in  his  discourses  and  in  his  bulls  publicly 
manifested  his  horror  at  the  crime  which  had  been  perpe- 
trated. 


498  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

We  cannot  hope,  however,  to  see  the  enemies  of  the  Church 
rehnquish  this  weapon.  Despite  the  refutations  of  learned 
Protestants  themselves,  they  persist  in  affirming  that  the 
ministers  of  Catharine  de  Medici's  vengeance  were  animated 
by  religious  hatred;  and  the  better  to  excite  the  passions 
they  continue,  with  Voltaire  and  a  celebrated  modern  opera, 
to  mingle  crucifixes  with  poignards,  and  to  represent  the 
cardinal  Charles  de  Lorraine,  who  was  in  Rome  at  the  time, 
as  blessing  in  Paris  the  poignards  destined  for  the  massacre. 

Remarks. — 1st.  It  may  be  well  to  observe  that  the  number 
of  victims  in  the  massacre  has  been  singularly  exaggerated. 
It  is  impossible  to  get  at  the  exact  truth  on  this  point:  the 
figures  of  the  historians  differ,  but  it  has  been  estabhshed  as 
very  probable  that  the  number  of  victims  did  not  exceed  two 
thousand — an  enormous  figure,  no  doubt,  but  considerably 
less  than  the  thirty  thousand  quoted  by  certain  authors,  and 
particularly  the  one  hundred  thousand  hazarded  by  Pere- 
fixe.  What  confidence,  moreover,  can  be  placed  in  accounts 
where  palpable  contradictions  meet  one  at  every  step?  The 
Marty rology  published  by  the  Calvinists  in  1582  speaks  of 
15,168  victims,  but  names  only  786.  Yet  the  author  had 
every  reason  to  magnify  this  number;  he  wrote,  moreover, 
at  a  time  when  the  crime  was  fresh  and  vivid  in  all  minds; 
and  as  his  list  contains  only  names  of  very  little  importance, 
we  may  beheve  that  he  gathered  every  item  that  could 
increase  the  number  of  the  martyrs  and  swell  the  volume 
of  the  martyrology. 

2d.  Nor  is  there  any  proof  that  the  massacre  had  been  long 
premeditated;  the  contrary  seems  to  be  well  estabhshed. 
M.  Kervyn  de  Lettenhove  sums  up  his  opinion  on  the  sub- 
ject as  follows:  "That  Catharine  de  Medici  carefully  pre- 
pared the  assassination  of  Coligny  there  is  no  possible  doubt; 
no  doubt  she  secretly  desired  to  be  rid  of  all  those  whom, 
she  thought,  she  had  any  reason  to  fear,  and  particularly 
the  Huguenots,  who  at  this  time  gave  her  much  anxiety. 
According  to  her  own  expression  she  desired  to  profit  by 


CERTAIN   ACCUSATIONS   AGAINST   THE    CHURCH.  499 

a  favorable  occasion,  del  caso.  All  contemporary  testimony 
disproves  the  existence  of  premeditation  in  the  massacre 
of  St.  Bartholomew,  which,  in  face  of  an  execrable  conspiracy, 
was  only  a  defence  which,  though  still  more  execrable,  was 
judged  necessary. "  (t.  II.  ch.  xxxii.) 

The  historian  concludes  the  same  chapter  thus:  "Such 
was  this  bloody  day  of  St.  Bartholomew,  which,  though 
studied  at  times  inaccurately  as  regards  its  causes  and 
its  phases,  adds  a  new  blot,  more  odious  than  all  the  others, 
to  the  ambition  and  craft  of  Catharine  de  Medici.  In  a 
few  hours  the  Huguenots,  from  the  role  of  conspirators 
passed  as  victims  into  history,  and  the  queen  mother,  at  a 
time  when  she  had  every  lawful  weapon  at  hand,  chose  to 
use  those  which  will  dishonor  her  memory  forever.'' 

2.  The  Revocation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes  by  Louis 
XIV.  has  also  become  a  theme  of  denunciations  and  accu- 
sations; absurd  as  they  are,  they  impress  the  ignorant,  and 
pass  from  mouth  to  mouth  without  examination.  The 
principles  previously  established  in  regard  to  the  relations 
which  should  exist  between  Church  and  State,  and  the  facts 
attested  by  impartial  history,  completely  refute  them,  how- 
ever.^ 

Historical  Notice. — Henry  IV.  by  his  edict  of  1598 
had  granted  the  Huguenots  not  only  liberty  of  conscience, 
but  also  much  liberty  of  worship  and  great  privileges.  Thus 
he  stipulated  that  they  should  be  ehgible  to  all  civil  offices 
and  employments  in  the  kingdom;  that  a  sum  of  one 
hundred  and  forty  thousand  pounds  should  be  paid  annually 
for  the  maintenance  of  the  ministers  of  the  reformed  re- 
ligion ;  that  all  the  places,  cities,  and  palaces,  to  the  number 
of  121,  occupied  by  the  Huguenots  should  be  protected  by  a 
guard  of  their  own  adherents,  and  the  garrison  paid  by  the 

*  Parsons,  IV.,  ch.  11;  Spalding,  J.  M.,  History  of  the  Reforma- 
tion, II.,  ch.  8;  Stang,  More  about  the  Huguenots;  Laughnan,  S.J. 
(C.T.S.  XX.,  and  in  M.  Ixxvi.  70,  234);  A.  C.  Q.  xix.  273;  D.  R., 
July  1893,  p.  599,  Oct.  1894,  p.  358;  C.  W.,  April  1898. 


500  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

king.  This  was  nothing  less,  as  Henry  IV.  himself  said  to 
Sully,  than  the  creation  of  a  republican  State  in  the  heart 
of  France.  By  an  edict  of  the  22d  of  October,  1685,  Louis 
XIV.  revoked  the  former  edict  granting  liberty  of  worship  and 
the  privileges  above  named,  leaving  the  Huguenots  liberty 
of  conscience. 

Let  us  observe,  especially  in  the  present  case,  that  there  is  a 
notable  difference  between  these  two  expressions.  Conscience 
is  something  wholly  interior,  which  necessarily  escapes  all  ex- 
terior opposition,  wliile  worship  means  something  exterior  and 
sensible.  When  a  sect  is  granted  liberty  of  conscience  only, 
it  is  not  allowed  to  hold  assembhes,  or  pubhc  worship,  or 
to  proselyte.  Its  adherents  are  simply  allowed  to  live  in 
peace  in  the  country  without  suffering  any  inconvenience 
because  of  their  religious  opinion  and  without  being  obliged 
to  take  part  in  any  other  worship.  Freedom  of  worship 
means  more:  it  permits  the  pubhc  profession  and  practice 
of  any  form  of  worship,  as  well  as  the  organization  of  its 
clergy,  ceremonies,  and  rehgious  practices. 

Was  the  edict  of  1685  lawful?  Was  it  opportune?  What 
must  we  think  of  its  execution  and  its  results? 

A.  The  lawfulness  of  the  edict  of  Louis  XIV.  is  easily 
demonstrated.  In  fact  the  Edict  of  Nantes, 'even  though  we 
regard  it  as  a  compact,  properly  speaking  was  by  no  means 
an  irrevocable  compact.  Even  the  Protestant  Grotius 
acknowledges  this.  ''The  so-called  reformers,"  he  says, 
''should  understand  that  these  acts  of  tolerance  are  not 
treaties,  but  royal  edicts  issued  for  the  general  good,  and 
revocable  when  the  king  judges  fitting  for  the  same  general 
good."  Louis  XIV.  therefore  had  a  right  to  revoke  the 
edict  of  his  predecessors. 

B.  Whether  this  measure  was  opportune  or  not  is  an 
historical  question  which,  strictly  speaking,  does  not  belong 
to  our  subject.      But  we  shall  make  a  few  remarks  upon  it. 

When  we  study  attentively  the  condition  of  France  and  the 
position  of  the  king  in  1598,  we  ask  ourselves  if  Henry  IV. 


CERTAIN   ACCUSATIONS   AGAINST   THE    CHURCH.  501 

can  be  blamed  for  the  course  he  pursued.  By  means  of  his 
second  edict  he  restored  peace  to  the  kingdom  and  re-estab- 
lished order  throughout  the  land.  We  know,  moreover,  that 
it  was  his  intention  to  withdraw  by  degrees  the  clauses  of  the 
former  edict  which  created  a  State  within  a  State.  Louis  XIII., 
Richeheu,  and  Louis  XIV.  (before  1685)  carried  out  the  in- 
tentions of  Henry  IV.  By  skilful  and  successive  measures 
they  gradually  reduced  the  liberty  accorded  to  sectarians, 
so  that  in  1685  the  complete  revocation  of  the  edict  was 
effected  without  difficulty:  the  fruit  was  ripe  and  naturally 
fell  from  the  tree. 

The  revocation  was  a  long-foreseen  event,  for  which  the 
pubhc  mind  was  prepared,  hence  it  excited  no  serious  opposi- 
tion. Moreover,  the  conduct  of  the  Huguenots  abundantly 
justified  rigorous  measures.  Revolting  against  the  State 
after  they  had  revolted  against  the  Church,  they  were  guilty 
of  numerous  profanations.  They  went  about  destroying 
crucifixes  and  images,  burning  churches  and  convents,  and 
thus  excited  against  them  the  nation  which  was  profoundly 
CathoUc.  ''These  outrages,  which  were  the  chief  features  of 
the  Reformation,  were  also,"  says  M.  de  Noailles, ''one  of  the 
chief  causes  of  the  aversion  which  it  inspired."  Then  the 
danger  threatened  in  Protestant  doctrine,  the  insurrections 
it  excited  in  Germany,  the  seditious  character  which  the 
Huguenot  meetings  soon  assumed,  excited  the  Parliament 
and  authority  more  and  more  against  them.  Moreover, 
three  rebellions  in  less  than  ten  years,  and  based  upon 
frivolous  pretexts,  were  more  than  sufficient  to  open  the 
eyes  of  the  bhndest  to  the  dangerous  character  of  these 
heretics. 

The  act  of  Louis  XIV.,  therefore,  was  not  sudden  and 
unforeseen,  but  systematically  planned  and  carried  out,  the 
state  of  pubhc  opinion  helping  him  not  a  little  to  make 
this  decision.  "The  revocation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes," 
according  to  Capefigue,  "was  a  patient  work,  developed  with 
special  care  and  prudence."    See  his  Histoire  de  Louis  XIV,, 


502  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

ch.  xxiv.,  which  contains  the  plan  and  intentions  of  the  king 
as  he  himself  wrote  them. 

C.  What  are  we  to  think  of  the  execution  and  the  results 
of  that  revocation  ? 

a.  In  regard  to  the  first  point,  impartial  writers  generally 
agree  in  censuring  some  of  the  measures  adopted;  they 
acknowledge  nevertheless  that  the  king  can  be  held  respon- 
sible for  them  only  in  as  far  as  he  trusted  to  agents  who 
deviated  from  his  formal  intentions.  As  to  the  clergy, 
their  share  in  the  revocation  consisted  in  the  gentle  measures 
which  accompanied  its  execution. 

A  truly  deplorable  effect  of  the  edict  of  Louis  XIV.  which 
ought  to  be  mentioned  was  the  hypocrisy  and  dissimulation 
of  Protestant  families  whose  assumed  CathoHcism  was  purely 
exterior  and  compulsory.  Their  opposition  to  rehgion  and 
the  State,  though  silent  and  passive  at  first,  contribuxed 
later  in  the  eighteenth  century  to  the  triumph  of  an  infidel 
philosophy.  It  was  particularly  from  1685  that  hbertines  or 
free-thinkers,  conspiring  with  secret  Protestants  and  Jan- 
senists,  began  the  fierce  war  which  ended  in  the  suppression 
of  the  Jesuits  and  the  outbreak  of  the  French  Revolution. 

h.  As  to  the  material  results  of  this  revocation,  it  would  be 
difficult  to  appreciate  them ;  we  have  no  accurate  estimate  of 
the  losses  occasioned  by  the  withdrawal  of  a  certain  number 
of  French  subjects  who  abandoned  their  country.  The 
figures  quoted  later  are  manifestly  exaggerated.  Moreover, 
the  losses  occasioned  by  the  revocation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes 
cannot  be  compared  to  the  enormous  losses  in  money  and 
human  hfe  which  the  Huguenots  cost  France. 

Here  also  we  would  brand  the  shameless  partiahty,  bad 
faith,  and  hypocrisy  of  a  certain  class  of  writers  always 
hostile  to  the  Church.  Certainly  the  governments  of  Ger- 
many, of  Switzerland,  of  Italy,  following  the  example  of  the 
sixteenth  century,  have  in  our  day  subjected  Catholics  to 
the  most  cruel  treatment.  Yet  these  have  never  claimed, 
like  the  Calvinists.  to  be  a  State  within  a  State,  nor  have 


CERTAIN  ACCUSATIONS  AGAINST  THE   CHURCH.  503 

they  ever  attempted  to  claim  their  rights  with  armed  force. 
On  the  contrary,  they  have  always  given,  and  still  give,  an 
example  of  most  complete  submission  to  the  laws.  Why, 
then,  are  they  persecuted?  Why  are  thousands  of  priests 
and  religious  men  and  women  expelled  from  their  country? 
Why?  Simply  because  they  are  Roman  CathoHcs.  Now,  do 
we  find  one  writer  among  free-thinkers,  these  vaunted  ad- 
vocates of  Hberty,  protesting  against  these  outrages?  No; 
they  prefer  to  reserve  their  denunciations  for  Louis  XIV. 
and  the  Inquisition.  The  motive  which  inspires  them  is  only 
too  palpable. 

ART.  v.— CRUSADES  AND   SO-CALLED   RELIGIOUS  WARS. 

1.  We  might  refrain  from  treating  this  question  of  the 
Crusades.^  We  have  only  to  read  an  impartial  history  to 
find  the  justification  of  these  warhke  expeditions  which 
exhibit  Christian  society  in  all  the  splendor  of  rehgious 
heroism.  Let  us  observe,  however,  that  the  end  or  motive 
of  the  Crusades  was  perfectly  just,  and  that,  so  far  from 
having  the  disastrous  effects  sometimes  attributed  to  them, 
they  were  productive  of  the  happiest  results. 

A.  The  Crusades  had  an  end  which  was  just,  generous,  and 
civihzing.  Mohammed  had  inspired  his  followers  with  the 
ardor  of  proselytizing  by  the  sword.  Their  fanaticism  had 
conquered  Spain  and,  though  arrested  by  the  vaHant  sword 
of  Charles  Martel,  meditated  the  conquest  of  the  East  and 
the  destruction  of  civilization.  The  Emperors  of  Constan- 
tinople appealed  to  the  Christians  of  the  East  to  protect  the 
last  bulwark  of  Europe,  and  the  Church  added  her  exhortation 
to  this  pressing  appeal.  After  Sylvester  II.  and  Sergius  IV. 
had  made  a  generous  appeal  in  behalf  of  the  Christians 

*  *  Michaud,  History  of  the  Crusades ;  *  Ardier  and  Kingsford,  The 
Crusades;  Parsons,  Studies,  11. ,  ch.  18;  Lies,  p.  286;  Alzog's  History  of 
the  Church,  II.,  pp.  610, 611 ;  Balmes,  ch.  42;  Spalding,  J.  M.,  Miscell., 
ch.  7;  A.  C.  Q.  Jan.  1903;  M.  Aug.  1898. 


504  CHEISl^IAN  AJ>OlOGE11CS. 

of  the  Holy  Land,  St.  Gregory  VII.  wrote  to  the  Emperor  in 
1074:  ''The  Christians  beyond  the  sea  who  are  suffering 
unheard-of  outrages,  and  are  daily  massacred  like  sheep, 
have  sent  to  me  in  their  great  need,  beseeching  me  to  help 
our  brethren  by  every  means  in  my  power  in  order  that  the 
Christian  religion  may  not,  God  forbid,  be  completely  anni- 
hilated in  our  time.'^ 

In  answering  the  appeal  made  by  Urban  II.  and  Peter  the 
Hermit  in  the  Council  of  Clermont  (1095)  the  Christian 
princes  felt  confident  they  were  obeying  the  will  of  God. 
Hitherto  they  had  only  defended  themselves;  now  they 
decided  to  carry  the  war  into  the  heart  of  Islamism,  which 
it  was  their  right  and  their  duty  to  do,  for  all  the  religious  and 
social  rights  of  European  nations  were  threatened  by  the 
Mohammedans.  Was  Europe  to  await  quietly  the  shame 
and  scourge  of  slavery;  was  every  Christian  nation  to  allow 
itself  to  be  oppressed,  instead  of  forming  with  all  the  others 
a  holy  league  against  the  enemies  of  the  cross?  ''When  we 
blame  these  enterprises,"  says  the  learned  de  Guignes  in  the 
Mimoires  de  VAcademie  des  inscriptions  et  des  belles-lettres 
(t.  Ixviii.),  "it  is  because  we  have  not  sufficiently  reflected 
upon  the  state  of  the  times.  The  Mussulmans  had  taken 
possession  of  Syria,  and  had  made  themselves  masters  of 
Africa,  of  Spain,  and  of  all  the  islands  of  the  Mediterranean, 
whence  they  continually  insulted  the  inhabitants  on  the 
shores  of  Italy.  Through  Spain  and  Corsica  they  entered  and 
ravaged  the  southern  provinces,  and  pillaged  all  the  vessels 
they  encountered.  Constantinople  was  a  powerful  barrier  to 
them;  should  they  succeed  in  their  attempt  against  it,  all 
Europe  would  be  endangered  and  run  the  risk  of  falling  into 
their  power.  Attacking  them  in  the  centre  of  their  empire 
would  reduce  their  strength  and  deal  them  a  blow  from  which 
they  could  never  recover.'' 

B.  The  Crusades,  it  is  true,  did  not  completely  accomphsh 
the  end  for  which  they  were  undertaken,  but  we  may  say  with 
Count  de  Maistre, "  Though  each  one  failed,  yet  all  succeeded/' 


CERTAIN  ACCUSATIONS  AGAINST  THE   CHURCH.  505 

To  judge  these  vast  enterprises  we  must  take  them  as  a 
whole,  without  stopping  at  the  abuses  and  faults  which  are 
the  result  of  human  passions,  and  which  are  to  be  found  in  all 
wars.  Mgr.  Pie,  in  the  panegyric  on  St.  Louis,  enumerates 
among  the  happy  results  of  the  Crusades: 

1st.  The  Moslem  conquest  of  Constantinople  and  the  sub- 
jugation of  the  East  retarded  four  hundred  years. 

2d.  The  saving  of  the  West  and  of  Christian  civilization 
from  the  brutalizing  rule  of  Islamism.  The  Ottoman  power, 
which  for  centuries  threatened  to  swallow  up  everything, 
was  so  weakened  and  received  such  a  mortal  blow  that  it 
continued  to  exist  only  through  the  indulgence  of  Christianity. 

3d.  The  people  of  Europe  were  delivered  from  the  evils 
which  they  brought  upon  themselves  by  the  dissension  and 
incessant  wars  of  prince  with  prince,  lord  with  lord,  city  with 
city.  The  passion  for  combats  with  which  the  knights  were 
filled  found  noble  vent:  ceasing  to  fight  among  themselves. 
Christian  warriors  imited  their  efforts  against  the  common 
enemy. 

4th.  The  condition  of  the  people  was  improved;  serfs 
and  vassals  were  freed  by  thousands;  the  commons  acquired 
rights  and  privileges  which  curbed  the  arbitrary  and  tyrannical 
power  of  the  lords. 

5th.  Agriculture,  science,  and  the  arts  also  reaped  great 
advantages.  Who  does  not  know  that  these  expeditions 
paved  the  way  for  the  beautiful  age  of  Leo  X.  and  Louis  XIV.? 

6th.  They  were  likewise  productive  of  much  spiritual  good. 
''Can  the  Christian,"  exclaims  Mgr.  Pie,  ''confine  his  gaze  to 
the  present  and  forget  the  grand  horizon  which  opens  be- 
yond the  tomb?  Ah!  what  matters  it  to  me,  a  man  of  the 
next  life,  what  matters  it  to  me  that  the  Crusades  are  judged 
wrong  according  to  the  cold  and  tardy  computations  of  our 
modem  calculators,  when  the  holy  Abbot  of  Clairvaux 
assures  me  that  he  learned  from  Heaven  that  this  employment 
of  the  mammon  of  iniquity  secured  to  thousands  of  French- 
men the    imperishable    treasures    of    supreme    beatitude? 


506  CHRISTIAN    APOLOGETICS. 

The  losses  of  the  terrestrial  country  were  soon  forgotten,  and 
the  heavenly  country  was  enriched  forever.  Men  of  time, 
you  speak  to  me  of  numbers;  and  I,  a  priest  of  eternity,  I 
know  but  one  number  which  interests  me  and  which  is 
worthy  of  my  attention,  the  eternal  number  of  the  elect." 

All  these  advantages  largely  compensated  for  the  checks 
which  the  Crusaders  suffered  in  consequence  of  dissensions 
and  rivalries  among  themselves  and  the  perfidy  of  the 
Greeks. 

2.  The  name  of  religious  wars  is  given  specially  to  the 
struggles  between  Catholics  and  Protestants  during  the  latter 
half  of  the  sixteenth  century.  Among  the  most  noted  was 
the  first,  which  began  with  the  massacre  of  Vassy  (1562), 
and  the  third,  which  terminated  by  the  conversion  of  Henry 
IV.  and  the  Edict  of  Nantes.  The  same  name  is  also  apphed 
to  the  wars  of  1625  and  1626,  under  Louis  XIII. ;  and  the  war 
of  the  Cevennes,  or  Camisards,  under  Louis  XIV.  They  have 
all  served  as  a  theme  of  denunciation  for  Protestants  and 
unbehevers,  yet  nothing  is  easier  than  to  justify  the  Church 
in  regard  to  them. 

1st.  She  has  never  admitted  the  Mohammedan  principle 
of  imposing  her  doctrine  by  force.  She  has  been  content  to 
protect  her  rights  acquired  either  over  the  society  which  she 
formed,  or  the  individuals  who  had  sworn  allegiance  to  her. 

2d.  The  wars  of  religion  from  the  thirteenth  century  have 
been  the  work  of  heresy  and  its  revolts  against  the  constituent 
principles  of  society.  Heretics,  not  content  with  waging  a 
war  of  words,  committed  the  most  barbarous  outrages  upon 
the  property  and  persons  of  individuals;  they  were  enemies 
of  order  and  civilization,  whom  rulers  were  obliged  to  sup- 
press and  chastise  by  force  of  arms. 

3d.  It  is  to  be  regretted  that  in  these  just  and  necessary 
wars  carried  on  by  CathoHc  princes  there  were  at  times  cruel 
reprisals,  yet  they  could  hardly  have  been  prevented.  It 
would,  however,  be  most  unjust  to  attribute  these  excesses 
to  the  Church,  whose  spirit  is  directly  opposed  to  them. 


CERTAIN   ACCUSATIONS    AGAINST   THE    CHURCH.  507 

4th.  Let  us  add  with  Montesquieu:  ''It  is  arguing  unfairly 
against  religion  to  enumerate  all  the  evils  it  has  produced 
(or,  rather,  of  which  it  has  been  the  occasion  or  pretext), 
without  considering  all  the  good  it  has  effected;  if  I  were  to 
relate  all  the  evils  caused  by  monarchies,  by  civil  laws,  by 
republican  governments,  I  should  relate  terrible  things. '^ 

If  these  arguments  so  often  used  against  religion  were 
sound,  we  should  be  logically  forced  to  condemn  and  to 
destroy  all  institutions — royalty,  civil  government,  military 
institutions,  and  society  itself.  We  cannot  read  the  history 
of  any  age  without  finding  a  series  of  crimes  which  fill  us  with 
horror,  of  dissensions  and  civil  wars  which  filled  the  world 
with  bloodshed.  Even  at  the  present  day,  despite  our 
advanced  civilization,  blood  still  flows  on  battle-fields.  Would 
it  be  logical  to  conclude  that  society  must  be  abolished  and 
that  it  would  be  preferable  for  men  to  betake  themselves 
to  the  forest  and  live  there  like  animals?  Yet  this  is  the 
conclusion  forced  upon  us  when  we  close  our  eyes  to  the  good 
results  of  an  institution  excellent  in  its  nature,  to  consider 
only  the  abuses  of  which  it  may  he  capable.  Such  is  not  the 
logic  of  a  reasoning  man :  in  considering  the  wars  occasioned 
by  religion  he  pities  humanity  capable  of  abusing  all  that 
is  most  sacred;  but  he  is  far  from  forgetting  the  innumer- 
able and  eminent  benefits  this  humanity  reaps  from  religion, 
and  the  virtue  it  teaches  man  to  practise. 


ART.  VI.— THE  PAPAL  POWER  OVER  TEMPORAL  RULERS 
IN  THE  MIDDLE  AGES. 

We  know  that  in  the  Middle  Ages  the  Pope  was  universally 
regarded  as  the  head  of  the  Christian  family,   and  acted 

*  Gosselin;  Murphy,  1.  c,  ch.  9-20;  Hergenrother,  Catholic  Church 
and  Christian  State,  vol.  i.,  Essays  6-12;  Manning,  Vatican  Decrees, 
ch.  2;  Kenrick,  Primacy,  ch.  15  ff.;  Parsons;  Studies,  II.,  ch.  15; 
Spalding,  J.  M.,  Miscell.,  Essay  8;  Wiseman,  Essays,  vol.  v.  (on 
Boniface  VIII.) ;  A.  C.  Q.  xiv.  410,  xv.  734;  D.  R.  New  Ser.  xvi.  368; 
M.  Ixx.  24.  Yorke-Wendtke,  Discussion,  pt.  II. ;  Br.  W.xii.,xiii., passim. 


608  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

accordingly:  he  summoned  sovereigns  and  their  subjects 
before  his  tribunals,  decided  disputes  between  kings,  imposed 
spiritual  penalties  upon  scandalous  and  obstinate  princes, 
deprived  of  their  dignities  and  their  rights  those  who  per- 
sisted in  their  disorders. 

As  there  is  question  of  the  heads  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
their  conduct  evidently  cannot  escape  the  criticism  of  the 
enemies  of  the  Church;  let  us  see  what  we  must  think  of  it. 

I.  The    Power  Exercised  by  the  Popes  in  the  Middle 
Ages  over  Temporal  Princes  was  Perfectly  Lawful. 

1.  This  power  was  founded  on  legislation,  or  the  public 
law  of  the  time,  that  is,  upon  political  constitutions  which  Chris- 
tian peoples,  their  general  assemblies,  or  their  rulers,  had 
freely  established.  The  Pope  was  then  regarded  by  princes 
and  peoples  as  the  natural  head  and  the  common  father  of 
Christianity.  It  is  not  astonishing,  then,  that  they  acknowl- 
edged his  right  to  decide  differences,  to  bring  back  the  recal- 
citrant to  their  duties,  and  to  constrain  the  perverse  and 
obstinate  by  excommunicating  or  deposing  them. 

2.  Most  of  the  monarchies  of  the  Middle  Ages  were  both 
elective  and  hereditary ;  this  was  notably  the  case  in  France, 
England,  and  Spain.  Usually  a  member  of  the  reigning 
family  was  chosen ;  but  the  son  himself,  to  succeed  the  father, 
had  to  be  recognized  by  the  national  assembly.  We  can 
readily  understand  that  these  assemblies  imposed  on  the 
sovereign  elected  conditions  to  which  he  pledged  himself. 
One  condition  was  fidelity  to  the  Cathohc  faith,  and  it  was 
stipulated  that  if  the  prince  deviated  from  it  or  persecuted 
it,  he  lost  his  power. 

3.  Many  princes,  moreover,  rendered  homage  for  their 
crown  to  the  see  of  Peter,  voluntarily  placing  in  subjection 
to  it  their  States  in  the  character  of  fiefs,  and  acknowledging 
themselves   its  vassals.^     Of  this  number  were  John  Lack- 

*  Hergenrother,  1.  c,  vol.  ii.,  Essay  10. 


CERTAIN   ACCUSATIONS   AGAINST   THE    CHURCH.  509 

land,  King  of  England  (1213),  Robert  Guiscard  of  Naples 
(1053),  Roger  II.  of  Sicily  (1130),  Peter  II.  of  Aragon.  St. 
Stephen,  King  of  Hungary,  had  also  in  the  year  1000 
offered  homage  for  his  kingdom,  and  Godfrey  of  Bouillon 
for  the  kingdom  of  Jerusalem.  In  virtue  of  these  acts  the 
Pope  had  over  all  these  States  the  ordinary  rights  of  a 
suzerain,  or  paramount  lord,  over  his  vassals.  We  know 
that  feudal  right  conferred  upon  the  suzerain  the  right  to 
punish  the  felony  of  a  vassal  who  failed  in  any  of  his  obh- 
gations:  he  could  take  his  fief  from  him  or  give  the  investi- 
ture of  it  to  another.  The  formula  of  the  oaths  taken  by 
the  vassals  of  the  Holy  See,  moreover,  attest  the  existence 
of  this  right  in  the  sovereign  Pontiff.  Let  us  remark,  in 
passing,  that  the  Pope  never  used  this  right  by  taking  to 
himself  either  the  whole  or  a  part  of  the  States  of  a  vassal 
guilty  of  felony. 

Remarks.— 1st.  To  judge  the  Middle  Ages  by  the  ideas 
which  prevailed  after  the  Protestant  Reformation,  and  partic- 
ularly after  the  peace  of  Westphaha,  when  equal  rights  were 
granted  to  the  various  Christian  communities,  would  be  to 
commit  a  deplorable  and  absurd  anachronism.  ''AH  Chris- 
tians," says  the  learned  Cardinal  Hergenrother  in  his  "  Catholic 
Church  and  Christian  State,"  "  formed  in  the  Middle  Ages  but 
one  family.  The  head,  the  father,  required  for  this  family 
was  supplied  by  him  whom  all  nations  honored  as  common 
father,  the  vicar  of  God,  the  successor  of  St.  Peter,  the 
representative  of  Jesus  Christ,  to  whom  was  confided  the 
power  to  feed  the  lambs  and  the  sheep."  "By  entering  the 
Church,"  writes  Canon  Moulart,  professor  in  the  University 
of  Louvain;  ''by  taking  Christianity  as  the  religion  of  the 
State  itself;  by  recognizing  in  the  end  of  religion  the  supreme 
and  sole  end  of  all  society  composed  of  mankind;  by  making, 
as  a  natural  consequence  of  these  premises,  their  laws  in 
harmony  with  supernatural  dogmas  and  morals,  the  nations 
of  Europe  attained  a  veritable  union  based  upon  a  complete 
uniformity  of    ideas,  interests,  tendencies,   and  legislation; 


610  CHRISTIAN    APOLOGETICS. 

and  they  thus  formed  Christendom."  In  this  author's 
beautiful  work  the  question  of  the  indirect  temporal  power 
of  the  Pope  is  very  fully  treated  {UEglise  et  VEtat). 

The  ceremonies  which  took  place  at  the  consecration  of 
the  Emperor  of  the  West  show  us  the  ideas  of  the  time.  The 
Pope  warned  the  Emperor  that  he  received  his  power  in  order 
to  govern  his  subjects  and  to  protect  the  true  Church  of  God. 
To  these  words  the  Emperor  replied  with  the  following  oath : 
''  1,  King  of  the  Romans,  by  the  grace  of  God  future  emperor, 
do  promise  and  swear  before  God  and  St.  Peter  to  be 
henceforth  the  protector  and  defender  of  the  sovereign  Pon- 
tiff of  the  Holy  Roman  Church  in  all  its  necessities  and 
needs;  I  will  guard  and  protect  all  its  possessions,  respect  its 
rights  to  the  best  of  my  power  and  knowledge,  with  the 
assistance  of  God,  in  good  and  pure  faith.  So  help  me  God 
and  the  holy  Gospels." 

The  tenor  of  this  oath  perfectly  explains  the  language  of 
the  vassals  of  Henry  IV.  at  the  time  of  his  quarrel  with 
Gregory  VII.  or  Hildebrand.  They  wrote  the  Emperor  that 
they  had  sworn  allegiance  to  him,  but  on  condition  that  he 
should  be  king  for  the  edification  and  not  for  the  destruction 
of  the  Church  of  God;  on  condition  that  he  should  govern 
according  to  the  laws  of  justice  respecting  the  property  and 
the  rights  of  all.  They  added  that  since  he  had  been  the 
first  to  violate  the  compact,  they  were  released  from  their 
oath  of  allegiance.  These  words  of  the  lords  clearly  mani- 
fest the  opinion  of  contemporaries  in  regard  to  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  empire. 

2d.  It  may  be  asked  if,  as  a  number  of  authors  say,  the 
power  of  the  Popes  in  the  Middle  Ages  had  not  still  another 
foundation  than  that  which  we  have  just  indicated,  whether 
it  was  not  also  in  virtue  of  the  divine  right  proper  to  them 
that  the  sovereign  Pontiff  frequently  interfered  in  affairs 
of  State?  This  is  a  question  concerning  which  there  is  much 
controversy  and  upon  which  theologians  differ.  We  cannot 
give  to  the  examination  of  this  question,  much  less  important 


CERTAIN  ACCUSATIONS   AGAINST   THE    CHURCH.  511 

moreover,  the  developments  it  requires.  Let  us  be  satisfied 
mth  saying  a  few  words  on  the  subject.  According  to  the 
teaching  of  theology,  the  Pope,  who  has  received  from  God 
a  direct  power  over  spiritual  things,  they  being  his  proper 
domain,  has  received  at  the  same  time  an  indirect  power  over 
temporal  things,  that  is,  as  far  as  is  necessary  to  the  Church, 
in  order  that  she  may  fulfil  her  mission.  But  there  is  a  great 
variety  of  opinion  as  to  what  this  indirect  power  consists  of. 
No  doubt  all  theologians  recognize  the  directive  power  of 
the  Pope:  that  it  belongs  to  him  to  interpret  authentically 
the  natural  law  and  the  divine  law;  to  enlighten  and  direct 
by  his  doctrinal  decisions  the  consciences  of  princes  and 
Christian  nations;  to  judge  the  morality  of  their  acts,  and 
to  inflict  ecclesiastical  penalties  upon  the  guilty.  But  as  to 
whether  he  may  go  further — for  example,  depose  monarchs 
or  rulers,  release  subjects  from  their  oath  of  allegiance — 
opinions  are  divided,  and  the  Church  has  given  no  decision.^ 
Bellarmin,  for  example,  sustains  that  he  can.  Others,  like 
Bianchi  and  Gousset,  say  that  the  sovereign  Pontiff  does  not 
himself  depose  a  ruler  who  is  obstinate  in  ill  doing,  he  confines 
himself  to  declaring  that  the  abuse  of  power  has  been  such 
that  it  entails  ipso  facto,  of  itself,  the  loss  of  this  power. 
There  is,  they  say,  a  pledge,  at  least  an  implicit  pledge,  of 
fidehty  between  the  king  and  his  subjects,  and  this  pledge 
is  dissolved  when  it  becomes  impossible  for  the  subjects  to 
preserve  the  faith  unless  the  prince  is  deposed;  for  the  obhga- 
tion  to  preserve  the  faith  is,  they  add,  a  divine  law,  while 
that  of  obeying  this  or  that  sovereign  is  a  human  law,  which 
must  yield  to  the  divine. 

Conclusion. — But  whatever  view  we  take  of  these  con- 
troverted questions,  one  thing  remains  certain,  viz.,  that  at 
this  time,  when  unity  of  faith  was  complete,  and  Church 
and  State  were  intimately  united,  there  existed  a  veritable 
agreement  by  which  the  ruler    pledged    himself  to  govern 

*  Manning,  Newman,  and  others  against  Gladstone;  Br.  W.  yi.  514, 
vii.  554,  X.  398,  xi.  often. 


512  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

with  justice,  to  defend  the  faith,  to  suppress  heresy,  and  not 
to  incur  excommunication  himself.  This  was  incontestably 
the  public  law  of  that  period,  and  these  are  facts  which  must 
be  borne  in  mind  when  we  consider  this  question.  Was  a 
ruler  false  to  his  pledge?  It  belonged  to  the  Head  of  Chris- 
tianity  to  decide  whether  he  merited  excommunication,  and 
eventually  whether  it  was  time  to  declare  the  subjects 
released  from  their  oath  of  obedience  to  the  unfaithful  man- 
datary who,  by  his  own  infidehty,  had  forfeited  his  former 
rights.  This  affords  a  perfect  explanation  of  the  conduct  of 
St.  Gregory  VII.  toward  the  Emperor  of  Germany,^  Henry 
IV. ;  that  of  Innocent  III.  toward  John  Lackland;  of  Innocent 
IV.  toward  Frederick  II.;  of  Boniface  VIII.  toward  Phihp 
le  Bel. 

II.  The  Popes  Exercised  their  Rights  in  a  Manner 
Very  Salutary  to  Society.^ 

1.  History  attests  that  the  Popes  during  the  Middle  Ages 
rendered  inestimable  service  on  the  one  hand  by  preventing 
princes  from  faihng  in  their  duties,  and  on  the  other  by 
keeping  the  people  in  just  submission.  The  people  were 
protected  by  them  against  the  tyranny  of  rulers,  and  rulers 
against  the  revolt  of  their  subjects.  See  the  history  of  John 
Lackland,  of  the  Emperor  Henry  IV.,  of  Frederick  I.,  of 
Frederick  11.^  The  Popes  were  the  true  safeguards  of  the 
legitimate  franchises  of  peoples.     Protestant  writers — Voigt, 

^  Life  of  Gregory  VII.  by  Villemain. 

'  Gosselin,  p.  II.,  ch.  4;  Murphy,  ch.  40;  Brann;  A.  C.  Q.  iv.  222; 
D.  R.,  April  1894,  p.  278. 

^In  1861  M.  Guizot  wrote  in  L'Eglise  et  la  Societe:  "All  things 
considered,  the  Papacy,  and  only  the  Papacy,  could  be  the  powerful 
mediator  by  defending,  in  the  name  of  religion,  the  natural  rights 
of  man  against  States,  princes,  and  the  various  nations  themselves; 
it  was  the  Papacy  which  reconciled  the  weak  with  the  strong  by 
always  inculcating  in  all  things  justice,  peace,  and  respect  for  duties 
and  engagements;  in  this  way  it  laid  the  foundation-stone  of  inter- 
national right  by  rising  against  the  claims  and  passions  of  brute  force.'' 


CERTAIN  ACCUSATIONS  AGAINST  THE   CHURCH.  513 

in  his  history  of  Gregory  VII.,  and  Hurter,  in  that  of  Innocent 
III.— prove  with  evidence  that  these  Popes  saved  civilization 
by  their  energetic  resistance  to  the  corruption  of  the  age 
and  the  ambitious  and  despotic  aims  of  emperors  Hke  Henry 
IV.  and  Frederick  II. 

2.  The  sentence  of  the  sovereign  Pontiff  frequently  de- 
cided quarrels  between  princes.  At  the  present  day  con- 
gresses have  taken  the  place  of  the  sovereign  Pontiff,  but  this 
system  does  not  offer  the  same  guarantee  of  impartiality  and 
light;  thus  it  did  not  prevent  the  partition  of  Poland,  the 
abohtion  of  the  ecclesiastical  principahties  after  the  French 
Revolution,  the  persecutions  in  Switzerland  and  elsewhere. 

Remark. — The  result  of  impartial  study  of  this  subject  has 
been  to  make  the  Papacy  of  the  Middle  Ages  so  highly  appre- 
ciated that  Urquhart,^  a  distinguished  Protestant  writer,  did 
not  hesitate  recently  to  ask  that  the  present  system  of  decid- 
ing international  questions  by  a  congress  be  abandoned  and 
recourse  be  had  to  the  supreme  arbitration  of  the  Pope.  At 
the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century  Leibnitz  said:  ''In  my 
opinion  Europe  and  the  civilized  world  ought  to  institute  at 
Rome  a  tribunal  of  arbitration  presided  over  by  the  Pope, 
which  should  take  cognizance  of  the  differences  between 
Christian  princes.  This  tribunal  estabhshed  over  princes 
to  direct  and  judge  them  would  bring  us  back  to  the  golden 
age."  The  celebrated  English  minister,  Pitt,  was  of  the 
same  opinion.  ''We  must/'  he  wrote  in  1794,  "find  a  new 
bond  to  unite  us  all.  The  Pope  alone  can  form  this  bond. 
Only  Rome  can  make  her  impartial  and  unprejudiced  voice 
heard;  for  no  one  doubts  for  an  instant  the  integrity  of  her 
judgment."  Finally,  let  us  hear  Voltaire  himself:  "The 
interest  of  the  human  race  requires  that  there  be  a  curb 
which  will  restrain  sovereigns  and  protect  the  life  of  nations: 
this  curb  of  religion  might  by  universal  consent  have  been 
placed  in  the  hands  of  the  Popes.'' 

*  An  Appeal  to  the  Pope.    See  O'ReUly,  Life  of  Leo  XIIL,  ch.  33. 


514  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

ART.  VII.— THE  TEMPORAL  SOVEREIGNTY  OF  THE  POPES. 

This  discussion  concerning  the  power  exercised  in  the 
Middle  Ages  by  the  Popes  over  temporal  princes  leads  us  to 
say  a  few  words  upon  a  very  different  question,  but  one  of 
great  importance  at  the  present  time,  the  temporal  power  of 
the  Pope.^ 

''  It  was  by  a  special  providence  of  God  that  this  authority 
(the  Church)  was  furnished  with  a  civil  principality  as  the 
best  safeguard  of  her  independence ''  (Leo  XIIL,  Encycl. 
on  Christian  States).  ''God/'  says  St.  Anselm,  "loves 
nothing  so  much  as  the  freedom  of  His  Church.'' 

History  witnesses  to  the  perfect  lawfulness  of  the  temporal 
sovereignty  of  the  Popes.  It  was  brought  about  so  naturally 
by  circumstances  that,  as  J.  De  Maistre  says,  "the  Popes 
became  sovereigns  without  knowing  it,  and  even  in  spite  of 
themselves."  In  the  fourth  and  particularly  in  the  sixth 
century  the  Church  of  Rome  possessed  vast  territories  in 
several  countries  of  Europe  and  in  Africa.  By  law  the 
imperial  sovereignty  still  existed,  but  in  fact  it  had  long 
been  supplanted  by  the  paternal  dominion  of  the  Roman 
pontiffs.  We  know  how  the  invasion  of  the  barbarians, 
and  the  abandonment   in   which    unhappy  Italy  was  left 

^Dupanloup;  Manning;  Ming;  Maglione;  Schroeder;  Chatard, 
Essays  5, 15,  17;  Gibbons,  Faith  of  0.  F.,  ch.  12;  Parsons,  Studies,  I., 
p.  501;  Abp.  Hughes'  Works,  vol.  ii.;  Murphy,  ch.  9;  A.  C.  Q.  xvii. 
72,  XXV.  776;  C.  W.  xxv.  609,  xxxv.  1,  lii.  340,  Iv.  425,  Dec.  1900, 
Feb.  1902;  M.  S.  H.,  June  1901,  June  1902;  M.  Ixvii.  305;  I.  E.  R., 
May  1893,  Sept.  1896;  Best,  Victories  of  Rome;  Lacordaire,  conf.  4 
on  the  Church.  On  Rome  under  the  Popes  see  Miley;  Maguire;  C.  W. 
xxviii.   101. 

The  reader  ought  to  remember  that  the  term  "the  temporal 
power  of  the  Pope"  is  variously  used  by  Catholic  writers.  Some, 
like  our  author,  use  it  to  indicate  the  princely  or  sovereign  power 
which  the  Pope  formerly  exercised  as  civil  ruler  over  the  so-called 
papal  states.  With  others  it  means  the  power  wielded  by  the  Popes 
of  the  Middle  Ages  over  Christian  nations  and  rulers  in  civil  and 
temporal  affairs,  as  explained  in  the  preceding  article. — ^Editor. 


CERTAIN   ACCUSATIONS   AGAINST   THE    CHURCH.  515 

by  the  emperors  of  Byzantium,  forced  the  populations  to 
seek  the  efficacious  protection  of  the  papacy,  which  several 
times  had  saved  them  from  the  most  imminent  peril  and 
caused  order  and  justice  to  reign  among  them.  The  temporal 
supremacy  of  the  Popes,  tacitly  acknowledged  by  the  em- 
perors of  Constantinople,  was  singularly  affirmed  by  the 
solemn  act  of  Pepin  le  Bref,  in  which  he  pledged  himself  to 
have  restored  to  the  Holy  See  all  the  cities  and  territories 
occupied  by  the  Lombards.  This  promise  was  not  only 
executed,  but  new  lands  were  added  by  him  to  the  restored 
provinces;  and  this  liberahty  was  sanctioned  in  754  by  an 
act  of  perpetual  cession  and  abandonment  to  the  Holy  See, 
signed  by  the  King  of  the  Lombards.  Then  followed  the 
rich  donations  of  Charlemagne,  and  later  those  of  Countess 
Mathilda.  The  great  emperor,  as  well  as  the  French  lords, 
solemnly  promised  to  preserve  to  the  Holy  See  the  States 
which  had  been  solemnly  restored  to  it. 

We  see  that  de  Maistre  had  reason  to  say, ''  There  is  nothing 
so  evidently  just  in  its  origin  as  this  Pontifical  Sovereignty. 
Hence  it  has  been  fearlessly  said:  If  the  possessions  of  the 
head  of  the  Church  are  questioned,  let  the  reigning  families 
of  the  present  day  prepare  to  descend  from  the  throne.'' 
''The  temporal  kingdom,"  says  the  Protestant  Gibbon,  '4s 
founded  upon  a  thousand  years  of  respect,  and  the  Popes' 
noblest  claim  to  temporal  sovereignty  is  the  free  choice  of  a 
people  delivered  by  them  from  servitude." 

We  do  not  need  to  refute  here  the  futile  objections  of  those 
who  seek  to  prove  that  the  spiritual  power  of  the  Pope  is 
incompatible  with  temporal  power.  We  have  the  history  of 
the  Papacy  itself  to  prove  that  temporal  independence  is, 
in  the  designs  of  Providence,  a  guarantee  of  the  spiritual 
independence  necessary  to  the  head  of  the  universal  Church.^ 

The  Bishop  of  Rome  was  not  made  Pope  by  acquiring  the  tem- 
poral principality;  but  that  principality  was  acquired  by  him,  or 
conferred  on  him,  because  he  was  already  Pope,  that  he  might  be 
independent  in  his  spiritual  government  of  the  universal  Church  " 
Br.  W.,  xii.,  p.  456  f. 


516  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

"For  the  Pope/^  said  Thiers  in  a  celebrated  discourse, 
"there  is  no  spiritual  independence  without  temporal  in- 
dependence, without  sovereignty."  The  truth  of  this  is 
sufficiently  demonstrated  by  what  takes  place  in  Russia  and 
Constantinople.  Napoleon  himself  recognized  how  important 
it  is  for  the  sovereign  Pontiff  to  be,  as  Bossuet  says,  "in  a 
state  to  exercise  more  freely  for  the  general  good  and  under 
the  protection  of  Christian  rulers  the  heavenly  power  of 
governing  souls."  Here  are  his  words  as  reported  by  the 
historian  of  Du  Consulat  et  de  V Empire:  "The  Pope  is  far 
from  Paris,  and  it  is  well  he  is;  he  is  neither  at  Madrid  nor  at 
Vienna,  and  for  this  reason  we  accept  his  spiritual  authority. 
At  Vienna  and  at  Madrid  the  same  must  be  said.  Do  you 
think  that  if  he  were  at  Paris  the  Austrians  and  Spaniards 
would  receive  his  decisions?  It  is  most  fortimate,  therefore, 
that  he  does  not  live  among  us,  and  that  hving  removed 
from  us  he  does  not  live  among  our  rivals,  but  dwells  in 
that  old  Rome  far  from  the  influence  of  the  German  emperors, 
far  from  the  rulers  of  France  and  the  kings  of  Spain,  holding 
the  balance  between  the  Catholic  sovereigns,  inchned  always 
a  little  toward  the  stronger,  but  protesting  promptly  if  the 
stronger  becomes  the  oppressor.  Centuries  have  brought  this 
about,  and  they  have  done  well.  For  the  government  of 
souls  it  is  the  best,  the  most  beneficent  institution  that  can 
be  imagined.  I  am  not  led  to  say  this  through  any  spirit  of 
devotion,  but  by  reason." 

We  might  add  other  proofs  in  favor  of  pontifical  royalty, 
notably  its  happy  effect  upon  the  interior  administration  of 
the  Church;  but  contemporary  events  set  forth  with  still 
greater  prominence  the  advantages  of  this  providential 
institution.  Moreover,  the  unanimity  mth  which  the 
enemies  of  the  Church  have  applauded  the  sacrilegious  out- 
rages which  we  have  had  the  misfortune  to  witness,  their 
eagerness  to  prevent  the  restoration  of  the  temporal  power, 
make  evident  to  all  faithful  children  of  the  Church  the 
lawfulness  and  the  opportuneness  of  the  claims  of  the  Holy 


CERTAIN  ACCUSATIONS  AGAINST  THE   CHURCH.  517 

See  and  of  the  Catholic  world.  We  unceasingly  demand  the 
restoration  of  the  temporal  power  of  the  Holy  See  in  order 
that  the  spiritual  supremacy  of  the  Popes  may  be  exercised 
freely  and  efficaciously.^ 


ART,  VIII.— BAD  POPES. 

One  of  the  charges  made  against  the  holiness  of  the 
Church  is:  the  Church  has  not  always  been  a  school  of 
morality,  since  its  very  heads  have  disgraced  the  pontifical 
chair. 

After  what  we  have  said  above,  pp.  321  ff.,  the  answer 
to  this  question  presents  no  difficulty. 

The  Church  labors  unceasingly  for  the  sanctification  of 
her  children:  this  is  her  mission.  But  the  grace  offered  to 
man  to  enfighten  his  intelhgence  and  strengthen  his  will 
in  no  way  constrains  him.  He  may  refuse  this  grace  and 
make  his  conduct  contradict  his  belief,  but  he  does  so  only 
by  stifling  his  conscience,  by  trampfing  under  foot  a  refigion 
which  imceasingly  calls  him  to  his  duty,  exhorts  him  to  the 
practice  of  virtue,  and  threatens  him  with  most  terrible 
punishments  if  he  persists  in  his  evil-doing.  Hence  there 
have  always  been  sinners  in  the  bosom  of  the  Church;  side 
by  side  with  great  virtues  we  find  vice  and  disorders,  the 
effects  of  the  weakness  and  malice  of  man's  heart. 

The  Popes  themselves,  notwithstanding  their  high  calling 
and  their  grave  obligations,  are  men :  if  they  are  inf alHble  in 
their  doctrinal  teaching,  they  are  not  impeccable.     They  may 

^  "  I  will  not,  of  course,  condone  the  spoliation  of  the  Papacy. 
That  spoUation  remains  a  crime  against  international  law,  and  a 
blot  on  the  history  of  Italy.  I  will  not  desist  from  proclaiming  that 
the  fitting  position  of  the  Papacy  amid  the  nations  of  Christendom 
is  one  of  plenary  independence."  Archbp.  Ireland,  Church  and 
Modern  Society. 

2  Murphy,  ch.  37;  Bp.  England's  Works,  vol.  ii.,  p.  436  ff.;  D.  R. 
Old  Ser.  xxxviii.  1 ;  C.  W.  xliv.  215, 365;  Burnet,  Path,  ch.  9;  Spalding, 
Evid.,  lect.  7,  n.  9. 


518  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

fall,  as  St.  Peter  himself  fell,  but  their  sin  is  the  act  of  the 
man  and  not  of  the  Pontiff;  these  stains,  wholly  personal, 
in  no  way  mar  the  holiness  or  the  authority  of  the  Holy  See.^ 
This  is  a  case  for  the  apphcation  of  Our  Saviour's  words: 
Do  what  they  tell  you  and  not  what  they  do.  (Matth. 
xxiii.  3). 

Remarks. — 1st.  History  shows  us  from  St.  Peter  to  Leo 
XIII.  259  Popes,  all  of  whom,  with  very  few  exceptions,  were 
irreproachable,  and  a  great  number  of  whom  were  men 
eminent  for  their  knowledge,  their  wisdom,  and  their  virtues. 
Is  not  this  a  spectacle  as  worthy  of  admiration  as  of  respect? 
Where  shall  we  find  in  the  civil  order  a  dynasty  comparable 
to  this  series  of  the  heads  of  the  Church  of  Rome? 

2d.  They  cite,  it  is  true,  a  few  Popes  who  seem  to  have  been 
an  exception,  particularly  Stephen  VI.  and  John  XII.  in 
the  tenth  century,  Benedict  IX.  in  the  eleventh,  and  Alex- 
ander VI.  at  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  century.  But,  first 
of  all,  this  number  is  very  small;  it  is  hardly  perceptible 
in  the  multitude  of  the  others.  Would  it  be  just  to  protest 
unceasingly  against  magistracy  because  a  few  magistrates 
failed  in  their  duty,  or  against  printing  because  there  are 
writers  who  abuse  the  invention? 

3d.  Moreover,  it  is  proved  that  many  of  the  facts  alleged 
against  the  Popes  have  been,  if  not  mahcious  inventions, 
greatly  exaggerated  or  falsely  represented.  Witness  the 
absurd  tale  of  the  female  Pope  Joan,  who,  it  was  alleged, 
occupied  the  chair  of  Peter  under  the  name  of  John  VIIL, 
after  the  death  of  Leo  IV.,  in  855.  This  fable,  which  was 
current  for  a  long  time,  is  now  recognized  as  one  of  the  most 

^  "  I  maintain  that  if  the  ancestry  of  Judah's  royal  Une,  magnificent 
as  it  was  and  destined  to  be  the  forerunner  of  Him  of  whom  St.  Paul 
had  many  and  great  things  to  declare,  could  yet  include  some  of  the 
worst  sinners,  why  might  not  the  apostolical  succession,  in  which 
was,  individually  or  collectively,  naught  so  holy  as  He  to  whom  all  the 
prophets  bore  witness,  in  whom  was  seen  on  earth  all  the  glory  of  the 
Father,  full  of  grace  and  truth?"  Purcell's  Debate  with  Campbell, 
p.  157.     See  also  the  excellent  remarks  ib.  p.  156. 


CERTAIN   ACCUSATIONS   AGAINST   THE    CHURCH.  519 

flagrant  historical  lies  by  Protestants  themselves,  and  by 
unbelievers,  such  as  Dumoulin,  Bayle,  and  Basnage.^  The 
memory  of  more  than  one  Pope  unjustly  defamed  by  writers 
hostile  to  the  Church  has  been  completely  restored,  and, 
what  is  more,  by  Protestant  historians.  This  was  the 
case,  for  example,  in  regard  to  Gregory  VII.  and  Inno- 
cent III.  2 

4th.  We  must  further  observe  that  no  Pope,  whatever 
his  private  life,  ever  issued  a  decree  contrary  to  the  purity 
of  faith  and  morals;  nor  has  one  ever  taught  or  instituted 
anything  for  the  purpose  of  legitimizing  his  disorders.  Cer- 
tainly we  cannot  say  as  much  for  the  heads  of  Protestantism. 
They  desired  nothing  so  much  as  to  abolish  cehbacy  and 
monastic  vows.  In  the  facts  which  we  have  stated  above 
we  recognize  a  striking  proof  of  the  assistance  which  God 
unceasingly  grants  His  Church.^ 

*  Doellinger,  Fables;  Parsons,  Studies,  II.,  ch.  2;  C.  W.  ix.  1. 

^  Dr.  0.  Brownson,  replying  in  C.  W.,  April  '69,  to  an  attack  on 
the  Popes  by  Harper^s  Magazine,  states  that  he  has  studied  the 
history  of  the  Roman  Pontiffs  with  great  care  and  diligence,  both 
as  an  antipapist  and  as  a  papist,  with  an  earnest  desire  to  find  facts 
against  the  Popes  and  with  an  equally  earnest  desire  to  ascertain 
the  exact  historical  truth.  As  a  result  of  his  investigations  he  lays 
down  the  rule  ''that  everything  that  reflects  injuriously  on  the 
character  of  a  Bishop  of  Rome  is  presumptively  false,  and  to  be 
accepted  only  on  the  most  indubitable  evidence."  Br.  W.,  xiii., 
p.  147. 

^  "  Nothing  gives  me  more  faith  in  the  genuineness  and  truth  of  our 
holy  religion  than  when,  in  reviewing  the  history  of  these  disgraceful 
enormities,  I  find  the  Church,  in  the  very  midst  of  scandal  enough 
to  blacken  and  overthrow  any  earthly  institution,  still  supported 
and  upheld  by  the  almighty  hand  of  God;  a  Church  that  has  stood 
through  all  that  the  gentleman  has  laid  to  the  charge  of  the  merely 
mortal  men  who  have  presided  for  a  season  over  its  destinies.  A 
few  of  them  have  erred  in  morals,  but  none  of  them  in  faith;  sound 
doctrine  and  sound  morals  were  seen  and  admired,  during  these  sad 
eclipses,  and  infidel  nations  were,  during  that  passing  obscurity 
in  Rome,  rejoicing  in  the  beams  of  the  orient  Sun  of  justice  heralded 
by  Catholic  missionaries."     Purcell's  Debate,  p.  145. 


620  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

In  regard  to  special  charges  against  certain  Popes  Tve 
may  consult  ecclesiastical  histories  or  special  works,  such  as 
those  by  Pastor  and  Mann. 

EDITOR'S  NOTE. 

The  author  takes  up  in  the  present  chapter  certain  accusations 
against  the  Church  taken  from  her  history.  But  in  a  countless  variety 
of  forms  she  is  also  charged  with  ''false,  immoral,  and  blasphemous" 
doctrines  and  practices,  charges  to  which  the  Catholic  apologist  must 
give  a  solid  reply.  This,  however,  would  demand  another  volume. 
Hence  it  must  suffice  here  to  tell  the  reader  where  he  may  find  compara- 
tively full  answers  to  those  vain  accusations. 

Much  will  be  found  in  the  books  mentioned  in  the  preface,  p.  9.  But 
Dr.  Ryder's  ''Catholic  Controversy"  is  undoubtedly  the  best  popular 
manual  of  this  kind.  Bishop  England  (his  works,  vols,  i.,  ii.,  iii.).  Card. 
Gibbons  (Faith  of  Our  Fathers),  Gother  (The  Papist  Misrepresented), 
Searle  (Plain  Facts),  Conway  (The  Question  Box),  and  Arnold's  Catholic 
Dictionary  take  up  most  of  the  subjects  mentioned  under  the  following 
four  heads: 

1.  The  Doctrines  of  Confession  (Hunter,  III.;  MeUa;  Spalding,  J.  M,, 
Miscell,  II.,  n.  24;  C.  T.  S.  xxxiv.),  Indulgences  (ib.,  also  Bp.  Hedley, 
O.  S.  B.);  Probabilism  and  Casuistry  (M.  xliii.  185,  Dec.  1901;  Rickaby, 
essay  3),  Lying  and  Equivocation  (U.  B.  Jan.  '95;  Rickaby,  essay  4; 
Jones,  S.J,,  Dishonest  Criticism),  Tyrannicide  (A.  C.  Q.  xxvii. ;  Hergen- 
roether,  C.  Ch.,  II.,  p.  233  ff. ;  Gerard,  Antidote),  Intention  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  sacraments  (Bp.  England,  I.,  p.  474  £f. ;  C.  T.  S.  xxiv. ;  Hunter, 
III.,  n.  683;  Dodsworth,  Popular  Delusions  and  Objections,  etc.,  p. 
54).     See  also  Newmai,  Development,  p.  381  ff. 

2.  The  practice  of  Simony  in  giving  money  for  Masses  and  sacraments 
(Ryder,  p.  239;  Searle,  p.  221),  for  indulgences  (Green;  Bp.  England, 
III.,  p.  13  ff.),  for  dispensation  from  Fasting  (e.  g.  Balla  cruciata,  Bp. 
England,  III.,  p.  191  ff.)  and  marriage  impediments,  for  ecclesiastical 
appointments  and  promotion  to  clerical  orders  (C.  W.  xxxiii.  245,  xxxv. 
738).     See  also  Gerard;  Dodsworth;  C.  T.  S.  vii.,  xi. 

3.  The  practice  of  Superstition  and  even  Idolatry  in  worshipping  the 
Sacred  Heart  of  Jesus  (Manning,  Miscell.,  II.,  p.  1;  Hunter,  ll,  n.  536; 
Dalgairns,  Devotion  to  the  S.  H.,  Introd. ;  C.  W.  May  1901),  the  Bl. 
Virgin  Marv,  the  Saints  and  Angels,  holy  relics  and  images  (Br.  W.  viii. 
117  ff. ;  Bp.  England,  II.,  p.  95  ff. ;  C.  T.  S.  xviii.  xxx.';  A.  E.  R.  Oct.  1902) ; 
in  using  blessed  articles,  e.  g.  scapulars,  medals,  beads,  and  the  crucifix; 
in  offering  prayers  for  the  Dead  (Bp.  England,  I.,  265  ff.).  See  also  Br. 
W.  vi.  337  ff.,  380  ff.;  Newman,  1.  c,  398  ff. ;  Hunter,  III.,  n.  842;  De 
Trevern;  Bagshawe,  Threshold;  S^gur,  Short  and  Famifiar  Answers; 
C.  T.  S.  iv.,  v.,  xiv.;   M.  June  1898,  May  1902;   Garside. 

4.  Useless  and  injurious  Observances,  e.  g.  Celibacy  (C.  T.  S.  xli. ;  J.  C, 
Why  Should  Priests  Wed?;  M.  May  1898),  Religious  Vows  and  life  in 
Convents  (Br.  W.  viii.  219;  St.  Thomas,  Apology  for  Religious  Orders; 
Feasey;  C.W.  March  1901 ;  M.Dec.  1899;  D.  R.,  Old  Ser.  xxx.  467;  C  T. 
S.  xix.,  xlvii.),  Communion  in  one  kind  (Garside,  p.  125),  Fasting  (Butler, 
Feasts  and  Fasts,  Tr.  5;  Gaume,  Catech.,  IV.  p.  319  ff.);  External  Cere- 
monial (Tyrrell;  Bridgett;  Bagshawe,  Credentials,  p.  258;  Chatard,  Truths, 
n.  8;  Burke,  Reasonableness  of  Catholic  Ceremonies;  C.  W.  June,  1901), 
Latin  language  in  public  service  (C.  T.  S.  ix. ;  Bp.  England,  IT.,  p.  50  ff.). 

5.  On  Scandals  and  Abuses  in  the  Church  see  Allnatt,  The  Church 
and  the  Sects,  1.  1;  Searle;  Dodsworth;  Ricards,  C.  Ch.,  p.  94  f.;  Spalding, 
J.  M.,  History  of  Reform.,  I.,  ch.  3. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  CHURCH  AND  CIVILIZATION ."^ 

"The  Church,  the  immortal  work  of  a  merciful  God,  al- 
though by  its  nature, '^  says  the  Holy  Father,  "it  aims 
primarily  at  the  salvation  of  souls  and  the  eternal  happiness 
of  heaven,  confers,  nevertheless,  in  the  temporal  order  so 
many  and  such  great  benefits  that  it  could  not  produce  more 
or  greater  if  it  had  been  specially  and  chiefly  instituted  to 
procure  the  prosperity  of  this  present  life''  (Encycl.  on 
Christian  States). 

This  chapter  will  be  a  commentary  upon  these  words 
of  Leo  XIII.  We  shall  show  what  the  Church  has  done  for 
civilization  and  the  temporal  happiness  of  nations;  but  we 
cannot  give  to  this  beautiful  and  vast  subject  the  develop- 
ment it  requires,  for  that  would  need  a  volume.  We  shall 
endeavor,  however,  to  say  sufficient  to  enable  us  to  recognize 
in  the  benefits  which  the  Church  has  conferred  upon  the 
world  a  new  mark  of  her  divine  origin:  the  tree  is  known 
by  its  fruits. 

The  object  of  civiHzation  is  the  development,  the  perfec- 
tion, the  welfare  of  the  whole  man  in  all  that  relates  to  this 

'  Leo  XIIL,  The  Church  and  CivHization  (O'Shea,  N.  Y.) ;  Allies, 
L,  11. ;  Balmes;  Manahan;  Montalembert;  Ozanam;  Thebaud,  Ch. 
and  M.  W.;  Moriarty;  Murphy,  pt.  iv.;  Hettinger,  Rev.  Rel.,  ch.  7; 
Schanz,  III.,  ch.  15;  Gibbons,  Ch.  Herit.;  Kenrick,  Primacy,  ch.  23; 
Spalding,  J.  M.,  Miscell.,  Essays  7  and  46;  Archbp.  Hughes,  I.; 
Lacordaire,  conf.  32  ff.  on  Cath.  Doctr.;  Br.  W.  ix.,  xii.,  xiv.;  A.  C.  Q. 
X.  193;  D.  R.  Old  Ser.  xxxiv.  (trade,  manufacture),  xlviii.  81,  422, 
New  Ser.  vi.  297,  xxi.  323,  and  xxii.  69  (usury  laws) :  C.  W.  i.  775, 
iii.  638,  Iviii.  1,  xiii.  342  legislation),  xxviii.  459  Gabor),  xxix.  192 
(medicine). 


522  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

present  life.  Man  appears  to  us  in  the  natural  order  in 
three  distinct  though  inseparable  states:  we  may  consider 
him  as  an  individual,  as  member  of  a  family,  as  member 
of  a  public  society.  If  his  happiness  is  to  be  complete, 
the  lawful  needs  of  his  soul  and  body  must  be  satisfied;  and 
in  his  family  as  well  as  in  civil  society  he  must  find  order, 
peace,  joy,  all  that  can  lawfully  conduce  to  the  happiness  of 
life.  In  other  words,  the  welfare  and  progress  must  extend 
to  the  whole  man  and  include  in  a  just  proportion  and  perfect 
balance  his  material,  intellectual,  and  moral  interest;  this 
progress  and  these  advantages  must  also  extend  to  society 
taken  collectively,  as  well  as  to  its  individual  members.  We 
have  remarked,  it  is  true,  that  the  proper  and  immediate 
mission  of  the  Church  is  not  to  civihze  nations  and  distribute 
to  them  the  benefits  of  this  present  life;  she  has  a  higher 
end:  to  sanctify  man,  to  reform  him  in  his  moral  and 
religious  fife,  and  thus  to  lead  him  to  the  eternal  happiness  of 
heaven.  But  it  is  very  evident  that  in  helping  man  to  gov- 
ern his  passions,  in  reforming  and  perfecting  souls,  in  setting 
before  them  the  reason  for  suffering  and  death,  in  teaching 
them,  with  the  prospect  of  heaven,  to  bear  the  trials  of  life 
with  patience,  Christianity  has  borne  its  fruits  from  the 
very  beginning :  it  has  contributed  powerfully  to  the  relative 
welfare  of  mankind  upon  earth.  By  elevating  and  enno- 
bling the  individuals  who  compose  society  it  necessarily 
exercised  a  civilizing  influence  upon  society  itself.  ''How 
admirable  is  the  Christian  religion,"  says  Montesquieu, 
"which,  though  it  seems  to  have  no  other  object  than  the 
happiness  of  the  other  life,  yet  makes  our  happiness  in  this." 
It  is  easy  to  convince  ourselves  of  the  truth  of  those  words, 
which  are,  moreover,  only  a  philosophic  and  social  com- 
mentary of  the  profound  words  of  St.  Paul:  ''Godhness  is 
profitable  to  all  things,  having  promise  of  the  life  that  now 
is,  and  of  that  which  is  to  come.''  We  may  give  a  still 
higher  definition  of  civilization  and  say  with  M.  Kurth 
that  "social  perfection,  or  in  other  words  civilization,  con- 


THE   CHURCH  AND   CIVILIZATION.  523 

sists  in  that  form  of  society  which  affords  its  members  the 
greatest  facilities  for  attaining  their  final  end."  In  fact, 
in  the  designs  of  God,  everything  here  below,  and  society 
itself,  is  given  to  man  to  help  him  to  attain  this  supreme  end 
of  his  existence,  his  eternal  salvation.  Hence  no  trace  of 
true  civiHzation  is  to  be  found  in  pagan  times.  But  as  one 
of  the  ends  of  this  chapter  is  to  answer  the  charges  made 
against  the  Church  in  the  name  of  civiHzation,  understood 
in  the  ordinary  sense,  we  shall  assume  our  adversary's 
views  in  order  to  refute  them. 


ART.    I.— THE   STATE  OF  THE  WORLD    BEFORE  CHRIST, 
OR  PAGAN    CIVILIZATION.^ 

I.  A  General  Glance. 

At  the  present  day,  when  the  Gospel  has  completely 
changed  and  regenerated  the  world,  we  are  apt  to  forget 
the  benefits  we  have  received  from  it,  or  to  enjoy  them  with 
proud  ingratitude.  We  speak  with  complacency  of  frater- 
nity, equahty,  philanthropy,  of  charity  itself,  but  we  are 
prone  to  forget  that  the  world  is  indebted  to  Jesus  Christ 
and  to  His  Church  for  these  noble  sentiments  and  civilizing 
virtues. 

Certainly  we  are  far  from  denying  the  material  civilization 
of  the  Roman  world  at  the  birth  of  the  Church.  We  acknowl- 
edge, on  the  contrary,  that  in  this  respect  it  had  attained  an 
extraordinary  degree  of  splendor.  Our  own  times,  despite 
all  our  inventions  and  discoveries,  can  hardly  be  compared 
to  the  old  world.  Count  de  Champagny  gives  a  striking 
picture  in  Les  Cesars  of  this  extraordinary  prosperity  of 
Rome.  Nor  can  we  deny  the  high  rank  which  pagan  Rome 
already  held  in  the  world  of  letters.  No  one  would  venture 
to  deny  the  writers  of  the  age  of  Augustus  and  Pericles  the 

*Th^baud,  Gentilism;  Marcy;  Allies,  vol.  i.,  ii.,  iii.;  Alzog,  Ch. 
Hist.,  I.,  hist,  introd.;  Manahan,  bk.  i.;  A.  C.  Q.  v.  468. 


524  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

superior  merit  of  form.  Their  style  is  enchanting,  and  the 
art  of  the  writer  is  carried  to  the  highest  degree.  Yet  under 
this  brilUant  exterior  and  attractive  form  we  find  absolute 
poverty  of  doctrine  and  lack  of  reality.  In  regard,  partic- 
ularly, to  religious  truths,  the  most  fimdamental  and  the 
most  necessary  to  man  in  this  world  and  in  the  next,  nothing 
but  doubt,  uncertainty,  contradictions,  and  monstroiis  errors 
prevail. 

But  do  this  material  grandeur  and  this  intellectual  superi- 
ority constitute  true  civilization,  or  have  they  ever  made  a 
people  happy?  Evidently  not,  for  the  true  happiness  of  in- 
dividuals as  well  as  of  peoples  cannot  consist  in  such  enjoy- 
ments. Man  was  created  to  know,  to  love,  and  to  serve  God 
in  this  world,  and  to  possess  Him  eternally  in  the  next. 
His  mind  and  his  heart  are  made  for  the  True  and  the  Good, 
that  is,  for  God  Himself.  In  vain  does  man  turn  from  his 
last  end,  in  vain  does  he  despise  or  ignore  it ;  it  nevertheless 
remains  his  end,  and  the  words  of  St.  Augustine  will  never 
cease  to  be  true:  "Thou  hast  made  us,  0  Lord,  for  Thy- 
self, and  our  heart  is  restless  until  it  finds  rest  in  Thee.'' 
Moreover,  experience  tells  us  plainly  enough  that  the  ca- 
pacity of  the  human  heart  is  infinite,  so  to  speak;  that  its 
desires  are  immense,  and  only  immensity  can  fill  it.  Now, 
neither  in  extent  nor  duration  can  immensity  be  found  in 
creatures.  What  do  all  creatures  avail  to  satisfy  the  human 
heart's  hunger  for  happiness?  They  are  hardly  more  than 
a  drop  in  the  ocean. 

And  then,  to  speak  only  of  ancient  times  and  the  very 
centres  of  pagan  civilization,  it  is  well  known  that  only  a 
limited  class  enjoyed  the  privileges  of  this  temporal  pros- 
perity. Cicero  tells  us  that  in  populous  Rome  there  were 
hardly  two  thousand  landowners.  In  the  reign  of  Nero 
six  great  landholders  possessed  half  the  Roman  province  of 
Africa,  that  is,  a  territory  much  larger  than  all  England. 
The  masses  were  miserable  and  knew  the  pleasures  of  their 
masters  only  to  envy  them.     Pauperism  was  a  deep  and 


THE    CHURCH   AND    CIVILIZATION.  525 

hideous  wound.  The  moral  picture  of  the  world  before 
Christianity  given  us  by  writers  of  antiquity  is  most  sad  and 
appalhng.  We  have  no  difficulty  in  acknowledging  that 
noble  thoughts,  generous  sentiments,  kind  and  beneficent 
deeds  are  to  be  found  in  pagan  antiquity,  for  the  image  of 
God  in  man,  though  horribly  disfigured,  has  never  been  com- 
pletely effaced.  But  it  is  no  less  certain  that  the  salient 
trait  of  all,  the  universal  and  dominant  character  of  the 
world  before  Christ,  was  pitiless  hardness  combined  with 
gross  immorality  of  institutions  and  customs.  Reality  on 
this  point  exceeds  anything  that  can  be  imagined,  and 
there  is  nothing  in  the  corruption  of  the  present  day  that 
can  be  compared  to  it.  The  gentlest  among  men  and 
the  most  polished  nations  exhibited  a  hardness  of  heart, 
a  contempt  for  humanity,  a  hatred  of  the  poor,  a  horror  of 
the  unfortunate,  a  thirst  for  blood,  murder,  and  infamy  of 
all  kinds,  that  we,  with  our  centuries  of  Christian  training, 
can  hardly  conceive  of.  The  whole  world  was  given  up  to  a 
boundless  pride,  an  unrestrained  selfishness,  a  cruel  sensuafity 
which  remorselessly  sacrificed  everything  to  its  desires. 

Let  us  hear  how  St.  Paul  sums  up  the  history  of  the  whole 
ancient  world.  Addressing  the  Romans,  whose  triumphant 
civilization  had  absorbed  all  the  strength  and  all  the  vices 
of  the  conquered  peoples,  he  tells  them  to  their  face  with 
that  intrepid  firmness  which  fears  no  contradiction:  You 
are  without  affection,  without  fidelity;  you  are  filled  with 
malice,  with  iniquity,  with  bitterness;  hateful,  hating  one 
another;  finally,  you  are  without  mercy  (Rom.  i.  and  iii.; 
Tit.  iii.).  And  yet  St.  Paul  is  the  most  reserved  of  all  the 
writers  of  that  time.  Plato,  Aristotle,  Aristophanes,  Plautus, 
Titus,  Livy,  Tacitus,  Juvenal,  Suetonius,  Plutarch,  Seneca, 
relate  the  horrors  of  pagan  society  with  a  good  faith  and 
indifference  which  make  one  shudder.  It  is  evident  this  was 
the  accepted  and  public  morality  of  the  most  civilized  nations. 
Strangers,  prisoners,  the  vanquished,  slaves,  debtors,  the  sick, 
the  poor,  the  aged,  children,  women,  all  who  were  weak, 


626  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

all  who  suffered,  all  who  labored — in  a  word,  the  great  ma- 
jority of  the  human  race  was  hated,  despised,  and  oppressed. 
The  rest  wallowed  in  the  mire  of  vice.  Vice  itself  was  deified ; 
it  had  its  temples,  its  priests,  its  altars  in  every  city  of  the 
world;  disorder  became  a  social  obligation,  and  immorality 
a  pubhc  worship.     (See  above,  p.  237  ff.) 

Such  was  the  pagan  world  before  the  coining  of  Christ. 
Now  to  this  world  without  pity,  without  love,  without  com- 
passion, without  virtue,  plunged  in  every  kind  of  error  and 
iniquity,  succeeded  the  world  we  know,  radiant  with  the 
light  of  truth,  of  purity,  of  charity.  What  wrought  this 
wonderful  transformation,  so  impossible  to  foresee?  What 
do  we  find  at  the  point  where  these  two  worlds  so 
widely  different  meet?  We  find  a  cross,  and  on  that  cross 
Jesus  Christ,  the  Foimder  of  Christianity,  djdng  to  redeem 
and  regenerate  fallen  and  degraded  humanity. 

Do  we  need  anything  further  to  recognize  the  divinity 
of  Jesus  Christ  and  His  work,  the  Catholic  Church? 

But  this  general  outline  will  hardly  suffice  to  make  us  ap- 
preciate the  extent  of  the  benefits  we  owe  to  Christ  and  to 
the  Church  our  Mother.  We  must  enter  somewhat  more 
into  detail  lest  it  be  imagined  that  we  have  painted  in  exag- 
gerated colors  the  brief  picture  which  we  have  given  of  the 
corruption  and  depravity  of  the  pagan  world.  It  is  under- 
stood, of  course,  that  there  are  certain  revolting  details  which 
we  shall  be  obliged  to  pass  over  in  silence. 

II.  The  Lot  of  Individuals. 

We  shall  speak  especially  of  slaves,  gladiators,  the  poor, 
the  working  classes,  that  is,  of  the  great  majority  of  mankind. 

I.    SLAVES.^ 

1.  Number  of  Slaves. — Mr.  Duruy,  formerly  Minister  of 
Education   in   France,    addressing    the   working    men   one 
day,  justly  observed  that  if  they  had  lived  in  ancient  times 
*  See  references  below,  p.  536. 


THE   CHURCH   AND    CIVILIZATION.  527 

probably  not  one  among  them  would  have  been  a  free  man; 
they  all  would  have  groaned  in  the  horrors  of  slavery.  In 
fact  the  liistorical  number  of  these  unfortunate  creatures 
is  marvellous.  In  Attica  alone  the  official  census  made  by 
Demetrius  Phalereus  gives  the  number  of  free  citizens  as 
20,000,  and  the  slaves  as  40,000.  At  Rome  one  Roman 
owned  1,000,  another  10,000,  another  20,000.  According 
to  Chateaubriand  and  Mgr.  De  Sahnis  six  milhon  men  who 
were  called  the  king's  people  oppressed,  persecuted,  and 
trampled  under  foot  one  hundred  and  twenty  milhon  slaves. 
In  brief,  the  number  of  the  slaves  was  so  great  that  the 
senate,  Seneca  tells  us,  would  never  permit  them  to  wear  a 
special  dress  lest  they  should  reahze  their  numbers.  ''There 
was  great  alarm,"  he  says,  ''at  the  small  number  of  free 
men."  It  is  to  be  noted,  moreover,  that  slavery  existed 
everywhere,  among  the  most  civiHzed  as  well  as  the  most 
barbarous  nations;  hence  we  may  say  that  at  the  coming 
of  Christ  the  greater  number  of  mankind  were  slaves. 

2.  How  Slaves  were  Regarded. — The  unanimous  teach- 
ing of  antiquity  was  that  slavery  was  founded  upon  natural 
law,  that  is,  that  among  men  some  are  bom  to  be  free, 
others  to  be  slaves.  "  Nature, "  says  Aristotle,  "  requires  that 
there  be  slaves."  Varron  enumerates  them  among  the 
implements  of  labor.  "There  is,  however,  a  difference,"  he 
says,  "oxen  bellow,  slaves  speak,  and  the  plough  is  silent." 
"A  wise  husbandman,"  says  Cato,  the  censor,  "must  get 
rid  of  all  implements  no  longer  in  use,  worn-out  ploughs,  old 
horses,  aged  slaves."  Hence  when  sickness  or  old  age  ren- 
dered them  useless  they  were  put  to  death  or  left  to  die  of 
hunger.  Nor  did  the  law  take  slaves  under  its  protection. 
On  the  contrary,  it  confirmed  these  barbarous  doctrines. 
In  the  eyes  of  the  law  a  slave  was  not  the  servant  but  the 
property  of  the  master;  he  was  not  a  man,  but  a  chattel. 
"He  was  null,  rather  than  vile — non  tarn  vilis  quam  nullus; 
there  was  no  rest  for  him — non  est  otium  servis;  he  counted 
as  nothing — pro  nullis  adhihentur;  a  slave  has  no  right — 


528  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

servus  nullum  caput  habet;  he  was  as  one  dead — servitus  morti 
assimilatur." 

3.  Treatment  of  Slaves. — If  such  were  the  opinions 
current  among  even  good  men,  if  such  were  the  laws,  we 
can  readily  imagine  the  fate  of  the  unfortunate  creatures 
condemned  by  birth,  by  the  fortunes  of  war,  by  debt  to 
servitude.  It  fills  one  with  horror  to  read  the  details  on  this 
subject  given  by  Fr.  de  Champagny  in  Les  Cesars.  Yet  he 
only  repeats  what  is  related  by  all  the  writers  of  antiquity 
without  the  least  protest  or  sign  of  disapproval. 

The  Roman  law  recognized  no  right  in  a  slave — servus 
nullum  jus  habet;  hence  his  master  could  treat  him  hke  a 
domestic  animal,  overwhelm  him  with  blows,  torture  him, 
and  even  put  him  to  death  without  being  held  responsible 
by  any  one;  there  was  no  obligation  towards  a  slave — in 
personam  servilem  nulla  cadit  obligatio.  The  law  required 
that  when  a  master  was  killed  by  one  of  his  slaves,  all 
the  others,  whatever  their  number,  dwelling  under  the 
same  roof  should  be  crucified.  It  is  needless  to  say  that 
the  pagan  masters,  usually  as  selfish  and  cruel  as  they  were 
vicious,  amply  availed  themselves  of  their  absolute  right  over 
their  slaves,  and  exceeded,  if  possible,  the  ferocity  of  the 
laws  by  their  barbarous  application  of  them.  The  lot  of 
these  unfortunate  creatures  was  frequently  so  terrible  that 
they  sometimes  flung  themselves  in  despair  into  the  arena 
to  be  devoured  by  wild  beasts.  To  lessen  the  expense  of 
the  animals  kept  for  the  circus  Cahgula  ordered  them  to 
be  fed  with  slaves. 

II.    GLADIATORS. 

In  addition  to  slavery,  there  was  something  still  more 
horrible,  before  Christianity:  the  games  of  the  circus  and 
the  combats  of  the  gladiators.  The  spectacle  of  men  killing 
one  another  or  devoured  by  wild  beasts  was  the  great  amuse- 
ment, the  supreme  pleasure,  of  the  Roman  people.  The 
day  being  all  too  short  for  such  pleasures,  the  slaughters 


THE   CHURCH  AND   CIVILIZATION.  529 

were  prolonged  into  the  night  by  the  light  of  torches.  All 
that  the  populace  asked  of  their  base  and  tyrannical  masters 
in  exchange  for  their  liberty  was  bread  and  amusement — 
partem  et  circenses. 

It  was  this  thirst  for  human  blood  which  built  the  vast 
enclosures  the  ruins  of  which  we  still  admire,  and  organized 
the  great  hunting  expeditions  in  remote  provinces  for  the 
purpose  of  capturing  alive  the  wild  animals  which  were 
baited  with  human  victims.  The  nobles  vied  with  one 
another  in  the  production  of  wild  beasts  for  the  slaughtering 
of  fellow  creatures  in  the  arena. 

The  human  combats  were  still  more  horrible ;  for  example, 
to  cite  a  single  instance,  at  the  celebration  of  the  triumph  of 
Titus,  who  was  called  the  delight  of  mankind,  thousands  of 
men  were  forced  to  fight  to  the  death  during  one  hundred 
days;  and  this  wise  emperor  himself  delivered  over  to  the 
circus  at  the  time  of  his  father's  obsequies  five  thousand 
gladiators.  The  good  Trajan  to  celebrate  his  triumph  over 
the  Dacians  gave  to  the  games,  which  lasted  one  hundred  and 
twenty-three  days,  ten  thousand  gladiators  and  eleven  thou- 
sand wild  beasts. 

In  the  mock  sea-fights  for  which  immense  reservoirs  were 
constructed,  millions  of  victims  perished  by  drowning. 
*'It  is  estimated,"  says  Loudun  in  his  work  L'Antiquite, 
"that  the  spectacle  of  the  gladiators  cost,  on  an  average, 
thirty  thousand  men  a  year."  In  fact  there  were  months 
in  which  more  than  twenty  thousand  men  slaughtered  one 
another  for  the  amusement  of  the  people. 

And  these  hideous  spectacles,  which  were  at  first  confined 
to  the  Romans,  spread  throughout  the  whole  empire,  into 
Gaul,  Greece,  and  Asia,  and  were,  moreover,  sanctioned  by 
the  law  and  approved  by  the  sages  of  the  time;  no  pagan 
was  ever  moved  to  pity  by  the  fate  of  these  unfortunate 
creatures;  the  victims  themselves,  forgetting  that  they 
had  a  right  to  live,  died  saluting  the  god  Caesar.  As  for 
Cicero,  Pliny,  and  all  the  fine  minds  of  the  time,  they  saw  ia 


530  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

these  cruel  games  only  a  noble  institution,  and  an  excellent 
discipline  to  fortify  the  people  against  suffering.  Pliny 
goes  so  far  in  his  panegyric  as  to  praise  Trajan  for  not  giving 
the  spectators  to  the  games.  But  humane  instincts  did  not 
always  prevail  to  this  extent;  on  one  occasion,  when  there 
were  no  gladiators  for  the  beasts,  Cahgula,  Tacitus  tells  us, 
ordered  that  the  first- comers  among  the  spectators  be  thrown 
into  the  arena,  taking  the  precaution  to  have  their  tongues 
cut  out  in  order  to  stifle  their  cries.  To  satisfy  the  thirst  of 
the  patricians  for  human  blood,  the  senate,  the  same  historian 
says,  decreed  that  the  gladiators  should  no  longer  fight  in 
couples,  but  in  masses  as  in  a  regular  battle. 


III.   THE   POOR   AND   THE    UNFORTUNATE. 

Marcus  Aurelius  the  philosopher,  who  passes  as  a  sage  in 
paganism,  does  not  hesitate  to  declare  it  weakness  to  pity 
the  unfortunate,  to  weep  with  those  who  weep.  Seneca  says 
that  mercy  is  a  vice  of  the  heart,  hence  good  people  should 
carefully  avoid  it.  ''The  true  sage,"  he  says  again,  ''is 
devoid  of  pity. "  The  following,  according  to  Cicero,  are 
some  of  the  precepts  of  Stoicism :  no  one  is  compassionate 
unless  he  is  f oohsh  or  thoughtless ;  a  true  man  never  allows 
himself  to  be  moved  or  touched;  it  is  a  misdemeanor  and 
a  crime  to  heed  the  promptings  of  compassion. 

We  would  not  cite  these  painful  and  deplorable  facts, 
except  that  they  enable  us  to  appreciate  the  depth  of  the 
abyss  whence  Jesus  Christ  raised  the  human  race.  In  a 
society  where  such  maxims  were  universally  accepted  we 
can  readily  understand  that  the  afflicted,  the  poor,  the 
unfortunate,  far  from  exciting  pity,  inspired  generally 
contempt,  disgust,  and  horror. 

"To  give  food  and  drink  to  a  poor  man,"  says  Plautus,  "is 
a  double  folly:  one  loses  what  he  gives,  and  prolongs  the 
misery  of  another."  "The  poor,"  says  Epictetus,  "are 
abandoned  like  a  dry,  infected  well,  from  which  all  turn  with 


THE   CHURCH   AND   CIVILIZATION.  531 

disgust.''    At  Athens  as  well  as  in  Egypt  a  man  who  had  no 
food  and  asked  for  it  was  punished  by  the  law  with  death. 

IV.   WORKMEN. 

As  to  labor,  we  may  say  that  it  was  generally  regarded 
with  contempt  among  pagans;  agriculture  and  all  branches 
of  industry  were  considered  dishonorable.  Cicero  is  loath 
to  except  in  this  general  anathema  medicine  and  architec- 
ture. Aristotle  proclaimed  labor  not  worthy  of  a  free  man. 
Plato  was  of  the  same  opinion.  Workmen  were  not  re- 
garded by  the  Greeks  as  worthy  of  the  name  of  citizen. 
According  to  Terence,  to  be  respected  one  must  lead  an  idle 
hfe,  and  not  be  obhged  to  work  for  a  Hvehhood. 

No  less  painful  things  could  also  be  related  of  the  treatment 
of  the  aged,  of  debtors,  of  prisoners,  but  the  facts  supported 
by  incontestable  testimony,  which  we  have  just  given,  enable 
us  to  divine  what  must  have  been  their  fate  in  this  society 
devoid  of  mercy. 

III.  The  Family.* 

We  know  to  what  a  degree  of  degradation  family  life  among 
pagans  had  fallen.  Brutal  selfishness  took  the  place  of 
mutual  affection.  The  very  weakness  of  women  and  children 
placed  them  in  abject  submission  to  the  head  of  the  family, 
who  was  not,  as  in  Christian  households,  the  spouse  and  father, 
but  the  master  and  tyrant.  This  state  of  things  was  only 
a  logical  consequence  of  the  doctrines  which  prevailed. 

A.  Woman,  in  the  eyes  of  pagan  nations,  was  not  man's 
companion  and  equal;  she  was  an  inferior  being  both  as 
regards  her  origin  and  her  destiny ;  her  condition  was  absolute 
servitude.  Greek  philosophy,  imitating  the  philosophy  of 
China,  India,  Persia,  and  Egypt,  has  always  been  pitiless 
toward  woman;  it  regarded  her  as  an  abject,  unclean,  wicked 
being,  having  no  soul;  hence  her  humiliating  and  degrading 

*  See  references  below  on  p.  541. 


532  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

position;  hence  the  practice  of  polygamy  in  the  majority 
of  nations,  with  its  innumerable  train  of  miseries;  hence, 
among  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  the  habitual  practice  of 
divorce,  no  less  disastrous  in  its  consequences,  and  which 
could  be  obtained  on  the  most  frivolous  and  the  vilest  pre- 
texts. Hence  also  the  almost  unlimited  power  of  the  husband 
over  the  wife,  and  of  the  father  over  the  daughter.  At 
every  period  of  paganism,  even  among  the  most  civihzed 
people,  the  right  of  hfe  and  death  which  he  exercised  was 
recognized  and  guaranteed  by  the  laws.  A  daughter, 
usually  sold  by  her  parents  to  the  man  she  was  to  marry, 
became  the  personal  property  of  her  husband,  and  endured 
all  the  consequences  of  this  position. 

B.  The  Child. — Nor  was  the  child  treated  any  better; 
it  was  also  completely  in  the  power  of  its  father.  At  Rome, 
when  a  child  was  born,  it  was  laid  at  the  feet  of  its  father;  if 
he  took  it  in  his  arms,  it  was  allowed  to  Hve;  hence  the 
expression  suscipere  liheros.  If,  on  the  contrary,  he  let  it 
lie  on  the  ground,  the  child  was  strangled,  or  thrown  with 
the  refuse  into  the  great  cesspool,  or  most  frequently  it 
perished  of  hunger.  Infanticide  and  a  thousand  other 
revolting  horrors  were  universally  admitted  and  practised 
among  pagan  nations.  Had  not  TertulUan  been  certain 
that  he  could  not  be  contradicted,  he  would  not  have  dared 
thus  to  apostrophize  the  pagans  of  his  time:  ''Among  those 
who  surround  us  and  who  thirst  for  the  blood  of  Christians, 
among  you  yourselves,  O  stern  magistrates,  so  severe  toward 
us,  who  is  there  who  has  not  put  his  own  child  to  death?" 

Moreover,  the  philosopher  Seneca  observes  on  the  same 
subject  "that  nothing  is  more  reasonable  than  to  remove 
useless  things  from  the  house;"  and  the  grave  Quintillian 
declares  that  "to  kill  a  man  is  frequently  a  crime,  but  to 
kill  one's  own  children  is  frequently  a  very  beautiful  action." 


THE   CHURCH   AND   CIVILIZATION  533 


IV.  Public  Society  and  the  Relations  Between 
Nations. 

A.  If  the  head  of  the  family  oppressed  all  who  depended 
upon  him,  he,  in  his  turn,  was  a  victim  to  the  tyranny  of  the 
State.  Among  pagans  there  was  no  sentiment  of  the  in- 
dependence and  the  dignity  of  man;  individuals  existed 
only  for  the  State;  they  were  valued  only  in  as  far  as  they 
were  capable  of  serving  the  country.  Country  was  a  divinity 
whose  orders  were  to  be  obeyed  at  any  price.  ^'The  State,'' 
says  Fustel  de  Coulanges  in  La  Cite  antique,  '' considered 
the  body  and  soul  of  each  individual  its  property;  hence 
its  desire  to  mould  this  body  and  soul  in  such  a  way  as 
to  derive  the  greatest  benefit  from  them.  .  .  .  The  human 
person  counted  for  very  little  before  this  holy  and  almost 
divine  authority  called  country  or  State.  .  .  .  There  was  no 
guarantee  for  the  hfe  of  a  man  when  there  was  question  of  the 
interest  of  the  commonwealth.  ...  It  was  thought  that 
right,  justice,  morality,  everything  should  yield  to  the  in- 
terest of  the  country.  .  .  .  The  government  called  itself,  by 
turns,  monarchy,  aristocracy,  democracy,  but  none  of  these 
evolutions  gave  man  true  Hberty,  individual  hberty." 
''Paganism,"  says  Balmes,  "never  seems  to  have  dreamed 
that  the  end,  the  object  of  society  was  the  welfare,  the  hap- 
piness of  famihes  and  individuals."  Hence  the  great  Cor- 
neille  had  indeed  reason  to  make  one  of  his  heroes  say: 

"  I  thank  the  gods  I  am  no  Roman, 
1  thus  preserve  a  spark  of  nature  human." 

Every  right  and  every  sentiment  of  nature  were  outraged, 
insulted,  violated  in  these  pitiless  constitutions  of  pagan 
antiquity.  ''All  the  power  of  the  Romans  was  vested  in 
Caesar;  Caesar  was  the  living  law,  the  real  divinity  of  the 
State  "  (Perin,  Les  lois  de  la  societe  chretienne,  t.  ii.).  "We 
do  not  even  find,"  says  Laboulaye  {UEtat  et  ses  limites), 
"  that  the  ancients  disputed  with  the  master  of  the  world 


534  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

what  seems  to  us  to-day  the  most  sacred  right  of  the  in- 
dividual, I  mean  conscience,  inteUigence,  labor.  Rehgion, 
education,  letters,  commerce,  industry,  everything  was  in 
the  hands  of  the  emperor  from  the  day  when  the  people, 
willingly  or  unwillingly,  transferred  to  Caesar  his  sovereign 
power.  Neither  Trajan  nor  Marcus  AureHus  doubted  for  a 
moment  that  his  power  was  unlimited.  They  governed  in 
the  name  of  the  people:  to  attempt  to  hmit  this  power 
was  a  crime  of  high  treason." 

The  worship  of  the  God-State  and  the  adoration  of  the 
emperors  may,  we  acknowledge,  have  produced  certain  acts 
of  fanatical  patriotism,  but  certainly  it  was  far  from  contrib- 
uting to  the  happiness  of  citizens  and  of  families. 

B.  The  relations  between  nations  were  no  less  deplorable. 
In  vain  do  we  seek  in  paganism  the  idea  of  fraternity  of 
nations,  or  the  shadow  of  a  principle  of  justice  in  their  re- 
lations. To  the  Romans,  society  was  Rome ;  to  the  Athenians, 
Athens.  Outside  of  Rome  and  Athens  there  existed  for 
them  only  coarse,  barbarous  peoples  condemned  to  live 
isolated  and  uncultivated.  If  a  man  owed  everything  to 
his  country,  he  recognized  no  rights  in  a  strange  nation. 
Each  nation  considered  the  other  as  enemies,  consequently 
dreamed  only  of  conquering  one  another.  Hence  wars  were 
incessant  and  victories  always  cruel:  the  vanquished  were 
massacred  or  reduced  to  slavery.  The  march  of  armies 
was  only  too  frequently  signahzed  by  blood-stained  ruins. 
The  complete  destruction  of  Carthage,  Numantia,  Corinth, 
and  numerous  other  cities  which  were  levelled  to  the  ground, 
bear  adequate  testimony  to  the  implacable  cruelty  of  the 
conquerors.  "Athens  did  not  think  she  exceeded  her  right 
when  she  decreed  that  all  the  Mitylenians,  without  distinction 
of  sex  or  age,  were  to  be  exterminated;  when,  the  next  day, 
she  revoked  her  decree  and  contented  herself  with  putting 
one  thousand  citizens  to  death  and  confiscating  their  lands 
she  believed  herself  humane  and  merciful."  (M.  Fustel  de 
Coulanges,  1.  c.) 


THE   CHURCH   AND   CIVILIZATION.  636 

ART.  II.— THE  STATE  OF  THE  WORLD  AFTER  CHRIST,  OR 
CHRISTIAN  CIVILIZATION. 

I.  A  General  Glance. 

"If  Christ  had  not  appeared  upon  earth,"  says  Labou- 
laye  (L  c.)/'  I  do  not  know  how  the  world  could  have  resisted 
the  despotism  which  was  stifling  it.  I  do  not  speak  here  as 
a  Christian,  I  set  aside  every  religious  question,  and  I  am 
only  an  historian.  In  this  character  I  affirm  that,  in  politics 
as  well  as  in  morals  and  philosophy,  the  Gospel  gave  new 
Hfe  to  souls.  We  have  reason  to  date  from  the  new  era, 
for  a  new  society  sprang  from  the  Gospel.'' 

We  have  spoken  elsewhere  of  the  miraculously  rapid 
propagation  of  the  Church  throughout  the  world  known  to 
the  ancients.  Therefore  it  was  impossible  for  the  world  to 
remain  as  it  was.  At  the  same  time,  this  marvellous  change 
could  not  be  the  work  of  a  day;  it  was  wrought  by  slow 
but  persevering  labor.  It  is  evident,  moreover,  that  there 
must  needs  have  been  fierce  war  between  paganism  and  the 
new  religion ;  between  the  empire  of  Satan  and  the  kingdom 
of  Christ.  On  one  side  was  material,  brute  force;  on  the 
other,  truth  and  her  invincible  patience.  Hence  we  see 
that  Christian  blood  flowed  for  three  centuries;  but  victory 
could  not  fail  to  crown  the  work  of  God.  With  Constantine 
the  triumphant  cross  became  a  sign  of  honor,  and  by  a  truly 
providential  dispensation,  the  heir  of  the  Caesars  transferred 
the  capital  of  the  empire  to  Byzantium,  as  if  to  permit  the 
seat  of  the  spiritual  power  to  be  established  at  Rome,  which 
had  hitherto  been  the  seat  of  the  civil  power. 

The  Church  did  not  wait  this  brilliant  triumph  to  begin 
her  labor  for  the  transformation  of  the  pagan  world.  This 
work  of  civilizing  nations  began  the  very  day  when  the 
head  of  the  apostles,  strengthened  with  power  from  on  high, 
wrought  his  first  conversions.  In  fact  the  Church  by 
changing  souls,  by  reforming  the  ideas,  sentiments,  and 
morals  of  individuals  and  families,  transformed  mankind. 


536  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

In  her  doctrine,  her  laws,  and  her  institutions  she  was  the 
antithesis  of  pagan  society:  by  the  very  fact  of  her  propa- 
gation she  must  gradually  transform  the  iniquitous  laws 
and  cruel  institutions  of  the  countries  she  subjected  to  her 
spiritual  empire.  ''According  as  Christianity  developed 
and  realized  the  miracle  of  its  universal  propagation,  Roman 
jurisprudence  could  not  but  be  affected  by  the  influence  of 
Christian  ideas:  an  indirect  influence  under  the  pagan 
emperors,  a  direct  influence  under  the  emperors  converted 
to  the  new  reUgion."  A  good  summary  of  the  principal 
characters  of  the  civilization  due  to  the  Catholic  Church  is 
to  be  found  in  the  twentieth  chapter  of  Balmes'  ''European 
Civilization."     Let  us  enter  into  a  few  details. 

II.  The  Lot  of  Individuals. 

I.    SLAVES    AND    GLADIATORS.^ 

A.  By  her  doctrines  and  her  institutions  the  Church  could 
not  but  ameUorate  the  condition  of  slaves,  raise  them  from 
their  state  of  shame  and  degradation  and,  finally,  free  them 
from  their  bonds.  Thus  she  declares  that  the  slave  has 
the  same  origin,  the  same  nature,  the  same  destiny  as  his 
master;  that  his  immortal  soul  is  of  the  same  value  in  the 
eyes  of  God;  that  he  also  has  been  redeemed  by  the  blood  of 
Jesus  Christ ;  that  he  has  a  right  to  seat  himself  at  the  same 
eucharistic  banquet;  that  he  may  occupy  even  a  higher 
place  than  his  master  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  where 
the  degree  of  glory  is  proportioned  only  to  virtue  and 
good  works.  ''There  is  neither  Jew  nor  Greek,''  says  St. 
Paul,  "there  is  neither  bond  nor  free,  there  is  neither  male 
nor  female,  for  you  are  all  one  in  Christ  Jesus"  (Gal.  iii.). 

^  Leo  XIIL,  Letter  to  the  Bishops  of  Brazil,  May  5,  1888,  and 
Encycl.  on  Abolition  of  Slavery  in  Africa,  Nov.  20,  1890;  Parsons, 
Studies,  VL,  ch.  13;  Brownlow;  Balmes,  ch.  15  ff.;  Hughes,  vol.  i.; 
England,  vol.  iii.;  Br.  W.  xv.;  A.  C.  Q.  ix.  358,  xiii.  577;  M.,  Jan.,  Feb. 
X890. 


tHE   CHURCH   AND   CIVILIZATION.  637 

''God  is  not  a  respecter  of  persons."  ''I  beseech  thee/' 
says  the  same  apostle  to  a  master  to  whom  he  was  writing 
in  behalf  of  a  runaway  slave,  ''I  beseech  thee  for  my  son 
whom  I  have  begotten  in  my  bonds,  Onesimus  .  .  .  receive 
him,  not  now  as  a  servant,  but  instead  of  a  servant  a  most 
dear  brother.  ...  If  he  hath  wronged  thee  in  anything,  put 
it  to  my  account."  Such  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Gospel. 
Without  annihilating  the  distinctions  necessary  for  the 
government  of  the  world,  without  disturbing  in  any  way 
the  hierarchy  of  conditions  and  powers,  without  forgetting 
the  duties  of  inferiors  toward  superiors,  she  pubHcly  pro- 
claims man's  nobility  before  God.  Could  her  doctrine  fail 
to  result  in  softening  the  lot  of  the  slave  and  in  gradually 
abolishing  slavery  itself?* 

Let  us  remark,  however,  that  the  Church,  despite  her 
soUcitude  for  these  unfortunate  creatures,  never  dreamed 
of  abolishing  slavery  at  one  blow;  this  she  had  neither  the 
right  nor  the  power  to  do.  Moreover,  the  political  situation 
of  the  time  did  not  permit  a  simultaneous  and  universal 
affranchisement:  terrible  disasters  would  have  been  the 
consequence  of  a  general  decree  of  abolition.  We  know 
that  the  whole  social  organization  was  then  dependent  upon 
slavery:  industry,  agriculture,  commerce  were  in  the  hands 
of  the  slaves.  Moreover,  the  slaves  were  not  prepared  for 
independence ;  to  free  them,  before  rescuing  them  from  their 
state  of  moral  degradation,  before  making  them  men  and 
Christians,  before  securing  them  a  means  of  subsistence, 
would  have  been  to  overthrow  society,  to  organize  a  general 

^  Though  there  was  much  that  was  unjust  and  against  nature  in  the 
treatment  of  slaves,  yet  it  cannot  be  stated  absolutely  that  slavery 
itself  is  contrary  to  nature.  It  can  never  be  allowed  to  reduce  man 
to  a  mere  "thing,"  to  arrogate  to  one's  self  an  absolute  right  over  the 
life  and  conscience  of  one's  fellow  man,  to  deprive  him  of  the  rights  of 
husband  and  father.  It  is  quite  important  to  observe  that  such 
was  not  the  slavery  sanctioned  by  the  Mosaic  law,  nor  the  institution 
of  colonists  (tenants)  and  serfs  in  the  Middle  Ages.  Neither  of 
these  implied  any  idea  whatever  of  moral  or  social  degradation. 


538  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

massacre  in  the  world,  and  to  condemn  the  slaves  themselves 
to  still  greater  misery. 

Witness,  for  example,  the  evils  which  followed  when  the 
French  Republic  declared  slaves  in  the  colonies  free.  Inter- 
ests connected  with  slavery  had  much  to  do  with  the  disas- 
trous Civil  War  in  the  United  States  between  the  North  and 
the  South.  Both  regarded  the  negro  as  a  sort  of  domestic 
animal,  but  the  South,  in  the  interest  of  agriculture,  wished 
to  preserve  slavery;  and  the  North,  in  the  interest  of  the 
manufactories,  wished  to  abohsh  it.  Faithful  to  the  traditions 
of  the  Church,  the  bishops  of  America  assembled  in  Council 
at  Baltimore  desired  that  the  negroes  be  gradually  freed. 

It  was  wisdom  on  the  part  of  the  Church  to  move  as  she 
did,  slowly:  she  could  not  proclaim  the  universal  freedom 
of  the  slaves,  but  by  employing  the  means  in  her  power  she 
efficaciously  prepared  the  way  for  the  complete  suppression 
of  slavery.  Under  her  inspiration  and  after  her  example 
governments  and  individuals  multiplied  affranchisements, 
and  the  laws  of  Christian  princes  favored  them.  Meanwhile 
nothing  was  spared  to  render  the  condition  of  the  unfortunate 
creatures  more  endurable.  For  further  details  of  the  aboli- 
tion of  slavery  see  the  works  of  Balmes  and  Bp.  England. 

As  to  the  barbarous  traffic  called  the  slave  trade,  the  Church, 
always  faithful  to  her  doctrines,  energetically  protested  from 
the  first  against  this  horrible  preying  of  man  upon  man. 
Witness  the  noble  and  courageous  language  of  the  apostohc 
letters  of  Pius  II.,  Paul  III.,  Urban  VIIL,  Benedict  XIV. 
(1462,  1537,  1639,  1741).  At  the  beginning  of  the  present 
century  Pius  VII.  succeeded  in  interesting  the  principal 
European  governments  in  the  holy  work  of  emancipating 
slaves.  Finally,  Gregory  XVI.  issued,  the  3d  of  November, 
1839,  new  apostolic  letters  which  afford  additional  proof  of 
the  Church's  maternal  solicitude  for  the  victims  of  inhuman 
cupidity.  And  like  testimony  is  furnished  by  the  crusade 
organized  under  the  patronage  of  Leo  XIII.  to  deliver 
Africa  from  the  horrible  scourge  which  each  year  carries  off 


THE   CHURCH   AND   CIVILIZATION.  539 

millions  of  free  men  to  reduce  them  to  the  most  cruel  slavery. 
Let  us  pray  that,  seconded  by  European  powers  and  by  the 
devotion  of  generous  hearts,  the  Church  may  bring  happier 
days  to  this  desolate  land. 

B.  The  gladiatorial  combats,  which  nothing  could  excuse 
or  justify  in  the  eyes  of  a  Christian,  must  naturally  disappear 
with  slavery.  These  cruel  games  had  been  proscribed  by  an 
edict  issued  in  392  in  the  name  of  Honorius  and  Arcadius. 
Yet  the  taste  for  these  sanguina  y  spectacles  was  not  stifled : 
it  needed  the  blood  of  a  martyr  to  abolish  them  completely. 
On  the  1st  of  January,  404,  when  Rome  was  celebrating  the 
election  of  the  consuls,  there  appeared  in  the  midst  of  the 
Coliseum  a  monk  from  the  East  named  Almachius.  He 
threw  himself  between  the  gladiators  to  separate  them,  then 
turning  to  the  crowd  said:  ''We  celebrate  to-day  the  octave 
of  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  God,  the  King  of  peace;  cease, 
then,  these  inhuman  games  invented  by  pagan  cruelty." 
At  these  words  a  terrible  tumult  arose  in  the  amphitheatre. 
The  infuriated  populace  fell  upon  Almachius  and  tore  him 
to  pieces.  The  next  day  Honorius  stopped  the  gladiatorial 
games.  ^ 

II.   THE   POOR  AND  THE   UNFORTUNATE.' 

The  lot  of  the  poor,  of  the  unfortunate,  of  all  the  disinherited, 
was  changed  on  the  day  when  Christ  said,  ''As  long  as  you 
did  it  to  one  of  these  My  least  brethren,  you  did  it  to  Me  '^ 
(Matth.  XXV.  40) ;  and  when  He  proclaimed  the  sentence  to 
be  given  at  the  Last  Judgment,  "I  was  hungry  and  you  gave 
Me  to  eat,"  etc.  (ib.  35  ff.)-  He  never  ceased  during  all  His 
life  to  repeat  His  precept,  so  new  and  strange  to  the  pagan 
world,  to  love  all  men  as  our  brethren,  as  we  love  ourselves, 

*  See  Butler's  Lives  of  the  Saints^  Jan.  1st. 

'  Baluffi;  Mulhane;  Lacordaire,  1.  c,  conf.  33  on  Cath.  Doctr.  and 
Soc'y;  C.  W.  iv.  434,  viii.  703,  734,  xlvii.  470;  D.  R.  New  Ser.  xxix. 
361,  XXX.  89,  xxxi.  12;  HI.,  Ser.  i.  26. 


540  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

or,  rather,  as  Christ  has  loved  us.  He  Himself,  moreover, 
chose  to  be  born  poor  and  to  Hve  in  poverty;  His  apostles 
were  poor;  the  poor  and  the  unfortunate  of  every  kind  were 
the  object  of  His  special  favor;  it  was  for  them  specially 
that  He  wrought  His  miracles;  He  was  severe  only  to  the 
hard  and  pitiless  rich.  Is  it  astonishing,  then,  that  the  poor, 
the  sick,  the  abandoned,  the  aged,  all  who  were  objects  of 
contempt  or  a  prey  to  suffering,  found  themselves  in  the  first 
ages  of  Christianity  surrounded  with  devoted  care?  Assist- 
ance of  every  kind  was  given  to  them  with  such  ingenious 
tenderness  that  the  pagans  were  forced  to  exclaim,  ''See 
how  these  Christians  love  one  another!"  Many  were  even 
attracted  to  the  new  rehgion  by  this  hitherto  imheard-of 
charity.  And  afterward  how  many  benevolent  institutions 
of  every  kind,  how  many  religious  orders  were  established 
to  relieve  the  numberless  miseries  to  which  mankind  is  a 
prey!  But  let  us  not  insist  upon  a  truth  so  manifest  and 
of  which  we  have  already  spoken  (pp.  240  ff). 

III.    WORKING     CLASSES. 

It  is  needless  to  say  how  the  Church  has  elevated  and 
ennobled  labor  and  the  laborer.  The  example  of  her  Founder 
Himself  and  of  His  first  apostles  speaks  with  sufficient 
eloquence.^ 

How  numerous  are  the  institutions  and  laws  created  or 
inspired  by  her  during  eighteen  centuries  to  lighten  the  lot 
of  the  working  classes,  to  reconcile  the  various  classes  of 
society,  to  unite  them  by  the  powerful  and  indissoluble  bond 
of  Christian  charity!  The  admirable  works  founded  by  the 
Church  in  favor  of  the  working  classes  found  their  full  de- 
velopment in  the  bosom  of  the  guilds  or  confraternities  of  the 
Middle  Ages. 

^Leo  XIII.,  Encyclicals  on  Socialism,  etc.,  Dec.  28, 1878;on  Work- 
ingmen,  May  15,  1891,  and  on  Christian  Democracy,  Jan.  18,  1901; 
D.  E.  Apr.,  July  1902  (PoUt.  Econ'y  of  LeoXHI.);  Bayaert,  ch.  6; 
Soderini;  Nitti,  Oath.  Socialism;  Bp.  Spalding,  Socialism,  etc. 


THE  CHURCH  AND   CIVILIZATION.  541 

In  the  last  century,  unfortunately,  the  most  fatal  doc- 
trines overthrew  the  edifice  so  patiently  reared  by  the  Church. 
The  troubles  and  disorders  which  followed  as  an  immediate 
consequence  are  known  to  the  world.  But  the  Church  is 
never  discouraged.  She  still  labors  with  an  ardor  inspired 
by  her  maternal  love  to  save  society  from  the  cata- 
clysm which  threatens  it.  Witness  the  admirable  encych- 
cal  of  Leo  XIII.  on  the  condition  of  the  working  classes, 
in  which  he  indicates  with  so  much  wisdom  the  most 
effectual  remedies  for  the  too  real  sufferings  of  the  work- 
ing classes.  The  encyclical  gives  a  complete  programme 
of  Christian  economy,  forming  a  striking  contrast  to  the 
anarchistic  egotism  of  the  French  Revolution.  Thus  the 
papacy,  faithful  to  the  traditions  of  the  past,  intervenes 
once  more  as  mediator  in  the  terrible  social  struggles  of  the 
present  day. 

III.  Family  Life.^ 

A.  Woman. — In  the  eyes  of  the  Church  woman  is  no  longer, 
as  in  pagan  times,  an  inferior,  degraded  being,  the  slave 
of  her  husband,  an  object  of  contempt  to  her  own  children; 
she  is  the  companion  of  man,  the  flesh  of  his  flesh,  the  bone 
of  his  bone;  she  has  resumed  in  the  household  the  place  of 
honor  which  belongs  to  her;  she  reigns  there  by  virtue  and 
love,  as  the  husband  by  authority.  It  was  by  reestablishing 
the  great  law  of  the  unity  and  indissolubiUty  of  marriage, 
raised  to  the  dignity  of  a  sacrament,  that  the  Church  restored 
to  woman  all  her  moral  dignity.  By  presenting  to  the  hom- 
age of  the  faithful  a  woman.  Virgin  and  Mother,  to  whom 

^  Devas;  Evans;  Humphrey,  S.J. ;  Monsabre;  Riche,  The  Family; 
Woolsey;  Lacordaire,  1.  c,  conf.  34;  Bp.  Spalding,  Socialism,  etc.,  ch. 
5;  Br.  W.  iii.,  xii.  339,  xiii.  526.  On  Marriage  and  Divorce  see  Leo 
XIII.,  Encycl.,  Febr.  10,  1880;  A.  C.  Q.  v.  312,  viii.  385,  xvi.  611; 
C.  W.  v.,  xvi.  585,  776,  xxv.  340,  xxxi.  550,  xxxv.  11,  xlviii.  23,  822; 
M.  xlviii.  254;  M.  S.  H.,  Jan.,  Febr.  1900.  On  Woman  see  A.  C.  Q. 
xi.  651 ;  C.  W.  xv.  78,  255,  366,  487,  xlv.  816;  D.  R.  III.  Ser.  v.  288; 
Br.  W.  xviii. 


542  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

Our  Saviour  Himself  paid  profoundest  respect;  by  honoring 
widows,  by  making  Christian  virgins  the  object  of  special 
veneration,  she  has  given  to  civiKzation  one  of  its  most 
indispensable  elements. 

B.  The  Child. — The  child  in  the  eyes  of  the  Christian  is 
a  son  of  God  and  heir  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven ;  regenerated 
by  Baptism,  he  becomes  the  temple  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Jesus  Himself  deigned  to  come  into  the  world  with  all  the 
weakness  and  miseries  of  infancy;  in  public  hfe  He  showed 
special  tenderness  toward  children;  He  even  declared  that 
we  must  become  like  them  to  enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven; 
finally,  He  pronounced  terrible  anathemas  against  all  who 
would  scandalize  them.  Therefore,  children  since  the  coming 
of  Christ  have  become  objects  of  tenderest  solicitude;  orphan- 
ages, nurseries,  schools,  colleges,  all  that  the  most  delicate 
charity  could  invent,  have  been  established  for  them. 


IV.  Public  Society  and  the  Relations  Between 
Nations. 

A.  From  what  we  have  said  it  is  clearly  evident  that 
pubUc  society  has  been  profoundly  modified  by  the  Church. 
In  fact,  by  changing  the  ideas  of  individuals,  by  reforming 
family  life,  the  Church  transformed  public  opinion  and 
pubHc  morals.  No  doubt  vicious  men  did  not  completely 
disappear  from  Christian  society,  for  man  preserves  with 
his  imperfect  liberty  the  possibility  of  failing  in  his  duty, 
but  vice  was  forced  to  hide  its  head,  it  became  a  dishonor, 
it  no  longer  held  the  place  it  had  held  in  pagan  society. 

By  proclaiming  that  *'all  power  comes  from  God,''  and 
that,  though  seated  on  a  throne,  princes  and  rulers  are  no 
less  obliged  to  obey  the  laws  of  God  and  to  govern  their 
subjects  by  wise  and  just  laws,  the  Church  put  an  end  to  the 
tyranny  of  the  State,  which  hitherto  had  recognized  no  will 
superior  to  its  own.    Thus,  how  far  removed  the  legislation 


THE    CHXJRCH   AND    CIVILIZATION.  543 

of  the  reign  of  Nero  from  that  of  Theodosius, — ^that  of 
Caligula  from  that  of  St.  Louis! 

By  repeating  at  the  same  time  to  the  governed  the  clear 
principle  contained  in  the  words  of  Jesus:  '^ Render  unto 
Caesar  the  things  that  are  Caesar's/'  the  Church  regulated 
the  duties  of  subjects  and  abolished  all  they  unjustly  claimed 
as  rights.  The  Christian  readily  submits  to  lawful  authority, 
but  tliis  obedience  is  not  abject,  for  it  is  paid  to  God's  repre- 
sentative; he  preserves,  moreover,  a  noble  independence, 
and  when  the  commands  of  the  human  power  positively 
contradict  the  divine  or  the  natural  law,  the  subject,  taking 
refuge  in  the  inviolable  sanctuary  of  his  conscience,  proudly 
repeats  the  words  of  the  apostles:  we  cannot — non  fossumusl 
''We  must  obey  God  rather  than  men."^ 

B.  It  is  evident  that  international  relations  could  not  but 
assume  a  more  humane  and  just  character.  Could  peoples, 
convinced  that  all  men  are  brethren,  children  of  God  and  of 
the  Church,  continue  to  treat  one  another  as  barbarians  and 
inhumanly  destroy  one  another? 

V.  Transformation  of  Barbarous  Nations. 

A  word  remains  to  be  said  of  the  work  of  the  Church  in 
civihzing  barbarous  nations,  who  in  the  fourth  and  fifth 
centuries,  particularly,  invaded  all  parts  of  the  Roman  world. 
Roman  society  was,  it  would  seem,  too  much  weakened 
by  the  dissolvent  action  of  paganism  to  be  capable  of  a 
complete  restoration.  God  used  these  barbarians  as  the 
ministers  of  His  vengeance  upon  the  persecuting  empire, 
and  at  the  same  time  to  revive,  after  its  conversion,  the 
languishing  West.  It  would  seem  as  though  the  leaders  of 
these  savage  hordes  were  conscious  of  their  terrible  mission: 
they  called  themselves  the  scourges  of  God.  The  spectacle 
Europe  presented  in  the  fifth  century  after  it  had  been 
literally  ravaged  by  them  witnessed  to  the  horrible  cruelty 

'Lacordaire,  1.  c,  conf.  35. 


544  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

with  which  these  avengers  sent  by  God  accomplished  their 
work.  Let  us  content  ourselves  with  a  few  brief  quota- 
tions : 

^*In  Spain '* — ^it  is  the  chronicler  Idacius  who  speaks — 
"pestilence  and  famine  followed  closely  in  the  bloody  foot- 
steps of  the  barbarians,  and  the  public  distress  was  so  great 
that  men  fed  upon  the  flesh  of  their  fellow  creatures,  and 
mothers  devoured  their  own  children.'^ 

In  Africa,  St.  Augustine  was  so  grieved  by  the  suffering 
which  the  Vandals  inflicted  upon  the  inhabitants  of  Hippo, 
and  upon  Africa  in  general,  that  he  begged  God  to  take  him 
to  Himself.  ''The  saint  beheld,"  says  the  historian  Possi- 
dius,  ''cities  ruined,  villages  destroyed,  the  inhabitants 
massacred  or  put  to  flight.  Some  had  expired  in  torments, 
others  had  perished  by  the  sword,  others  again,  reduced  to 
slavery,  served  pitiless  masters.  Those  who  escaped  the 
conquerors  took  refuge  in  the  woods  or  in  the  caves  in  the 
rocks,  where  they  died  of  hunger  and  misery." 

Italy  was  no  less  fortunate,  for  she  was  pillaged  from  one 
end  to  the  other.  The  pillage  of  Rome  by  Alaric  lasted  three 
days;  that  of  Genseric  with  his  Vandals  two  weeks,  and 
the  ruin  effected  by  the  latter  was  so  great  that  the  word 
vandalism  has  become  a  synonym  for  destruction.^ 

The  historian  Guildas  tells  us  that  "the  red  tongue  of 
incendiarism  swept  Great  Britain  from  sea  to  sea;  that 
fragments  of  towers  and  walls,  stones  of  altars,  blood-stained 
bodies  lay  heaped  together  in  the  public  places,  and  that  the 
only  sepulchre  for  the  dead  was  the  houses  in  ruins,  or  the 
stomach  of  the  wild  beasts  and  birds  of  prey." 

These  horrible  ravages  no  longer  astonish  us  when  we  learn 
from  history  the  physical,  and  particularly  the  intellectual 
and  moral,  condition  of  the  barbarians.  We  can  form  some 
idea  of  it  from  the  work  of  Ozanam,  Les  Germains  avant  le 
Christianisme.  In  chapter  iii.  we  find  that  family  life  among 
these  people  differed  httle  from  that  of  the  pagans,  of  which 

^Allies,  vol.  iij. . 


THE  CHURCH  AND  CIVILIZATION.  645 

we  have  given  a  brief  sketch.  Here  also  the  head  of  the 
family  was  the  tyrant  to  his  wife,  his  children,  and  to  his 
slaves.  The  warriors  themselves,  the  only  Hving  power 
esteemed  by  the  nation,  were  relegated  to  domestic  duties 
with  the  women  when  age  or  infirmities  rendered  them  in- 
capable of  brandishing  a  battle-axe :  if  they  were  unable  to 
be  of  service,  all  that  remained  for  them  was  to  die.  In 
Sweden,  old  men  ended  their  days  by  being  thrown  from  the 
top  of  high  rocks;  among  the  HeruH  they  were  slain  with 
sword-thrusts,  for  it  was  supposed  that  in  order  to  be  re- 
ceived by  Odin  into  Walhalla  one  must  bear  the  mark  of 
the  sword. 

Neither  in  the  tastes  nor  in  the  morals  of  the  barbarians; 
neither  in  their  pohtical  institutions  nor  in  their  religion, 
which  was  a  sort  of  fetichism  and  flattered  their  instincts  of 
murder  and  carnage,  was  there  anything  which  showed  them 
capable  of  regenerating  the  old  society  of  Rome.  Their 
invasion  would  inevitably  have  annihilated  all  civilization 
if  the  Church  had  not  been  at  hand  to  subjugate  the  in- 
vaders and  effect  harmony  between  the  conquering  and  the 
conquered  race. 

We  have  no  need  to  state  in  detail  the  means  by  which  the 
Church  transformed  these  fierce  spirits  into  the  Christian 
nations  which  history  presents  to  our  admiration.  Nourished 
by  the  same  teachers,  subjected  to  the  same  religious  laws, 
obeying  pastors  chosen  without  distinction  from  the  two 
races,  kneehng  at  the  same  altars,  partaking  of  the  same 
eucharistic  banquet,  the  Romans  and  the  barbarians  could 
not  but  end  by  being  fused  into  one  new  people,  destined  to 
reap  all  the  happy  fruits  of  Christian  civilization.  Among 
the  institutions  especially  fitted  to  civiHze  barbarous  peoples 
we  may  mention  the  Truce  of  God,  the  right  of  asylum,  and 
chivalry.^ 

But  here  again  the  transformation  was  not  wrought  in  a 
day.  The  Church  had  a  difficult  task  to  enlighten  the 
*  Parsons,  Studies,  II.,  ch.  19;  Balmes,  ch.  27. 


546  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

intelligence,  to  subdue  the  will,  to  modify  the  customs  and 
pohtical  institutions  of  these  naturally  fierce  men.  Several 
centuries  were  necessary  to  soften  the  savage  harshness  of 
these  rude  natures  and  temper  the  fervid  heat  of  their  blood; 
hence  for  a  long  time,  side  by  side  with  the  most  heroic  virtues 
and  veritable  marvels  of  holiness,  we  find  sanguinary  customs 
and  monstrous  crimes;  but  the  Church,  by  force  of  perse- 
verance and  patient  firmness,  triumphed  over  the  world  of 
barbarism  as  she  triumphed  over  the  pagan  world. 

VI.  Catholic  and  Protestant  Nations. 

Before  pursuing  this  study  of  the  civilizing  influence  of  the 
Church,  it  may  be  well  to  refute,  in  a  few  words,  a  trite 
objection,  which  nevertheless  impresses  unthinking  minds. 
It  is  founded  on  a  comparison  between  Cathohc  and  Protes- 
tant nations  of  Europe.  There  are  not  wanting  men  who 
affirm  that  the  civihzation  of  the  latter  is  higher,  and  they 
do  not  hesitate  to  attribute  the  honor  of  this  alleged  supe- 
riority to  Protestantism  itself,  and  to  hold  it  as  a  proof 
of  the  lawfulness  of  the  Reformation.  Let  us  mention  a 
few  principles  which  will  suffice  completely  to  destroy  this 
objection.^ 

1.  The  falseness  of  Protestantism,  as  well  as  the  truth  of 
CathoHcism,  has  been  demonstrated  by  peremptory  argu- 
ments. Until  the  force  of  such  proofs  is  weakened,  all 
conclusions  of  this  kind  will  be  absolutely  of  no  value ;  they 
are  merely  a  repetition  of  the  gross  sophism,  post  hoc  aut 
cum  hoc,  ergo  propter  hoc.  Simple  anteriority  or  concomitance 
is  in  no  way  a  relation  of  cause. 

*  Young;  Haulleville;  Balmes;  Vaughan;  Spalding,  .J.  L.,  Essays; 
Spalding,  J.  M.,  Miscell.,  Essays  25-30,  43,  46;  Newman,  Anglican 
Difficulties,  vol.  i.,  pt.  2;  Ri cards,  Cath.  Chr.,  ch.  14;  Alnatt,  The 
Church  and  the  Sects,  11.  1,  2;  Br.  W.  vii.  347,  517,  xii.  309,  xiii.  184, 
201,  222  Csame  in  C.  W.  x.);  A.  C.  Q.  viii.  1,  xxv.  791;  C.  W.  ix.  52, 
845,  x.  50,  xi.  106,  xxii.  577,  721,  xxiii.  30,  xxxiv.  1  (Ireland  and 
England) ;  D.  R.  New  Ser.  xxix.  418;  U.  B.,  Oct.  '98. 


THE   CHURCH   AND   CIVILIZATION.  547 

2.  Good  is  found  where  truth  is.  No  doubt  a  false  religion, 
by  means  of  the  truths  which  it  has  preserved,  may  be  useful 
to  the  State,  but  it  is  no  less  true  that  religious  truth,  pure  and 
entire,  will  necessarily  be  more  productive  of  good  to  the 
State.  Nor  can  it  be  otherwise,  since  true  religion,  at  the 
same  time  that  it  enhghtens  the  intelhgence,  communicates 
to  the  will  the  strength  necessary  to  make  our  conduct  in 
harmony  with  our  belief,  and  thus  contributes  powerfully  to 
the  happiness  of  individuals,  of  families,  and  of  society. 
Moreover,  we  have  demonstrated  by  incontestable  facts  thai 
Catholicism  created  modern  civihzation  at  a  time  when 
there  was  no  question  of  Protestantism.  What  it  did  in  the 
past  is  it  not  capable  of  doing  in  the  present?  Has  truth  or 
the  nature  of  man  changed? 

3.  A  rehgious  doctrine  which  denies  free-will,  which  de- 
clares that  faith  alone  is  necessary  for  salvation,  that  good 
works  are  reprehensible  and  of  no  avail  in  the  sight  of  God, 
which  teaches  the  inadmissibihty  of  justice — is  it  fitted  to 
civilize  nations,  to  procure  them  real  peace  and  happiness? 
With  such  principles  what  must  become  of  public  as  well  as 
private  morality?  That  innumerable  Protestants  do  not 
carry  these  disastrous  maxims  into  practice  only  proves  that 
they  are  fortunately  inconsistent,  but  it  does  not  redound 
to  the  praise  of  Protestantism  or  to  the  credit  of  its  civihzing 
power. 

4.  Even  admitting  that  Protestant  nations  of  the  present 
day  possess  a  higher  civilization  (taking  the  word  in  the 
sense  of  our  opponents)  than  Catholic  nations  of  Europe, 
yet  it  cannot  be  the  effect  of  the  religion,  for,  the  same  causes 
always  producing  the  same  effects,  this  superiority  ought 
to  have  been  evident  in  each  of  the  preceding  centuries 
since  the  beginning  of  the  Reformation.  Now  history 
undoubtedly  attests  the  contrary.  To  convince  ourselves 
of  this  we  have  only  to  go  back  to  the  beginning  of  this 
century,  when  Napoleon  I.  was  the  arbiter  of  Europe. 
And  before  him  it  certainly  was  not   Prussia  or  England 


548  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

which  held  the  balance  of  poHtical  power,  but  the  most 
profoundly  Catholic  nations,  Spain,  France,  and  Austria. 
And  if  Protestantism  is  so  preeminently  civilizing,  why  are 
not  Sweden,  Norway,  and  Denmark,  so  long  invaded  by  the 
Reformation,  also  at  the  head  of  civiHzed  nations?  On 
the  contrary,  if  France  has  lost  her  political  preponderance, 
it  certainly  has  not  been  because  her  present  government  is 
too  deeply  attached  to  the  Church. 

5.  We  are  far  from  admitting,  moreover,  the  superior 
civilization  claimed  for  nations  separated  from  the  Church. 
If  it  were  only  a  question  of  pohtical  preponderance,  of 
material  riches,  of  commercial  genius  or  matters  of  a  Hke 
nature,  we  should  have  no  difficulty  in  acknowledging  that 
at  the  present  moment  the  balance  is  manifestly  in  favor  of 
Protestant  nations.  But  a  preponderance  created  by  a 
few  successful  combats  may  rapidly  disappear  for  contrary 
causes.  Would  civiHzation  disappear  at  the  same  time 
with  victory?  Who  would  venture  to  claim  that  Prussia's 
success  at  Sadowa  and  Sedan  was  due  to  her  rehgion?  It 
would  be  only  too  easy  to  draw  from  the  history  of  preceding 
centuries  a  diametrically  opposite  conclusion  which  tells  in 
favor  of  Catholicism.  Would  you  say,  for  example,  that 
the  invading  barbarians  were  more  civihzed  than  the  nations 
they  conquered  by  their  arms,  or  that  the  victorious  Turks 
surpassed  in  civilization  their  fallen  enemies?  In  paganism 
also  there  were  rich  and  powerful  nations,  but  their  power 
and  their  riches  were  purchased  at  the  price  of  human  dignity, 
and  individual  Hberty  trampled  under  foot  in  millions  of 
slaves  by  a  small  number  of  free  men.  Side  by  side  with  a 
few  colossal  fortunes  there  may  be  the  greatest  misery  and 
still  more  deplorable  degradation  in  the  masses. 

6.  ''The  question  of  the  primacy  of  nations,''  says  Aug. 
Nicolas,  ''is  of  all  things  in  the  world  the  vainest,  as  long  as 
we  do  not  seek  the  standard  which  should  serve  as  a  basis  of 
appreciation. "  This  standard  is  certainly  not  wealth,  or  lux- 
ury, or  commerce,  or  industries,  or  powerful  manufactories,  or 


THE   CHURCH    AND   CIVILIZATION.  549 

even  political  power;  it  is  man  himself,  it  is,  above  all,  his 
soul,  his  intelligence,  and  his  free-will.  We  have  shown  that 
the  Catholic  Church  has  done  everything  for  individual 
liberty,  for  the  advancement  and  sanctification  of  souls,  and 
thus  for  the  happiness  of  individuals  and  of  society.  More- 
over, as  we  have  repeatedly  observed,  the  Church  by  no 
means  despises  material  progress,  the  welfare  of  society; 
she  encourages,  blesses,  and  hails  with  acclamation  the  dis- 
coveries of  science  and  the  marvels  of  industry.  But  she 
cannot  forget  that  man  is  not  placed  in  this  world  for  the 
enjoyment  of  temporal  good,  but,  on  the  contrary,  to  love 
and  serve  God  and  merit  heaven;  she  unceasingly  tells  him, 
on  the  authority  of  God's  word,  that  it  will  avail  him  nothing 
to  gain  the  whole  world  if  he  lose  his  soul.  She  does  not 
wish  that  the  ''spirit  be  sacrificed  to  the  body  and  the  body 
to  the  machine,  "  and  she  declares  with  the  Psalmist,  "Happy 
the  people  whose  God  is  the  Lord! "  (Ps.  cxliii.)  In  what  way 
can  such  maxims,  which  moderate  all  the  passions  and  favor 
all  virtues,  injure  the  true  happiness  of  individuals,  of  fam- 
ihes,  and  of  nations,  or  hinder  their  triple  development, 
material,  intellectual,  and  moral?  The  decalogue  and  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  which  are  the  principle  of  all  civihza- 
tion,  are  nowhere  taught  more  efficaciously  than  in  the 
Catholic  Church. 

We  might  appeal  to  facts  here,  and  compare  the  morality 
of  Catholic  and  Protestant  nations.  But  we  do  not  think 
that  statistics  on  this  point  are  sufficiently  advanced  to 
enable  us  to  form  a  complete  judgment  in  the  matter.  Statis- 
tics, however,  as  they  stand  at  present  are  not  favorable  to 
heretical  nations.  And  if  immorality  is  making  alarming 
progress  in  Cathohc  countries,  it  is  certainly  not  because  the 
precepts  of  Catholicism  are  too  faithfully  observed  by  the 
people.  We  have  shown,  on  the  contrary,  that  the  morality 
of  the  founders  of  Protestantism  could  not  but  foster,  and 
did  in  reality  cause,  frightful  immorality.  (V.  pp.  343  and 
348.)    Finally,  even  in  Protestant  countries  the  most  moral 


650  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

as  well  as  the  happiest  parts  of  the  country  are  those  where 
Catholicism  flourishes.  As  to  the  other  provinces,  we  must 
not  forget  that  they  are  still  largely  influenced  by  what  they 
have  retained  of  the  teaching  and  practices  of  Catholicism 
which  they  formerly  possessed.  If  immorality  is  not  greater 
among  them,  it  is  despite  the  maxims  of  Luther  and  Calvin. 

ART.  III.— THE  CHURCH  AND  INTELLECTUAL  CULTURE.^ 

I.  The  Influence  of  the  Church  on  Letters  and  Science. 

The  object  of  civihzation,  we  have  said,  is  the  perfecting 
of  the  whole  man  in  all  that  relates  to  the  present  life,  and  it 
includes  not  only  his  material  interests,  but  also,  and  above 
all,  his  moral  and  intellectual  interests. 

It  is  of  capital  importance  to  provide  for  the  intellectual 
perfection  of  man,  for  it  is  precisely  his  intelhgence  which 
distinguishes  him  from  the  animal.  What  part,  then,  has 
the  Church  taken  in  this  civilizing  labor?  We  would  state 
it  briefly  before  concluding  this  chapter.  It  will  afford  still 
another  answer  to  a  charge  already  refuted,  but  which  is  as 
wide-spread  as  it  is  unjust. 

Let  us  begin  first  of  all  by  recalling  what  we  have  said 
elsewhere,  viz.,  that  the  sole,  proper,  direct  mission  of  the 
Church,  the  end  of  her  foundation,  is  to  preserve  the  deposit 
of  Revelation  brought  by  Jesus  Christ,  and  to  communicate 
it  to  men  of  good-will,  to  enable  them  to  attain  salvation. 
Therefore,  even  though  the  Church  had  not  labored  for  the 
intellectual  progress  of  humanity  it  could  not  be  alleged  as  a 
charge  against  her.     Who  would  think  of  accusing  a  com- 

^Azarias;  Brennan;  Townsend;  Drane;  Allies, ii.,iii., v.;  Thebaud; 
Maitland;  Zahm;  Spalding,  J.  M.,  Miscell.,  Essays  4  ff.;  Balmes,  ch. 
69  ff. ;  Newman,  Anglican  Difficulties,  vol.  i.,  pt.  2,  1.  8;  Historical 
Sketches,  vol.  iii.  (universities);  Br.  W.  ix.  457,  568;  A.  C.  Q.  i.  504; 
viii.  264,  xiii.  255,  xvii.  263;  xxv.  456,  xxvii.  105;  C.  W.  v.,  vi.,  xvi. 
74, 145,  xxi.  721,  xliv.  145;  D.  R.  III.  Ser.  i.  1,  xiv.  243,  July  '97,  July 
'99.     See  also  references  p.  554. 


THE   CHURCH   AND   CIVILIZATION.  551 

mercial  society  of  not  promoting  literature,  or  an  academy 
of  sciences  of  not  producing  sculptors  or  musicians?  It 
would  be  no  less  absurd  to  attack  the  Church  on  the  ground 
that  she  had  not  contributed  to  the  advanceitient  of  science 
and  letters. 

Nevertheless,  this  Church  which  exercised  such  a  salutary 
influence  upon  the  ancient  world;  which  prepared  the  way 
for  the  abolition  of,  and  even  to  a  great  extent  abolished,  the 
crying  abuses  which  will  be  the  eternal  dishonor  of  paganism; 
which  can  boast  of  having  indirectly  and  over  and  above 
its  spiritual  influence  civihzed  the  barbarous  nations  estab- 
hshed  on  the  ruins  of  the  Roman  Empire,  has  also  acquired 
claims  to  the  gratitude  of  nations  for  special  benefits  in  the 
intellectual  order. 

1.  The  proper  work  and  mission  of  the  Church  is  the  moral 
and  religious  teaching  ot  all  mankind;  yet  the  duty  of  teach- 
ing imposed  upon  her  ministers  has  never  excluded  the 
various  forms  of  knowledge  which  may  adorn  the  human 
intelligence.  The  Church's  care  of  man,  so  dear  to  God, 
saved  by  His  precious  blood,  must  extend  to  the  whole  man. 
The  human  sciences,  moreover,  are  far  from  being  useless  for 
the  subUme  end  of  Christianity.  They  help  the  soul  to 
grasp  more  promptly  the  fundamental  principles  of  faith  and 
the  virtues  which  it  teaches.  They  open  a  passage,  as  it 
were,  through  which  these  virtues  enter  the  intelligence 
more  easily  and  penetrate  more  deeply.  Thus  we  find  the 
Church  inscribes  in  her  laws,  in  her  canon  law,  these  two 
sentences  which  express  her  thought  witli  energetic  brevity: 
''Ignorance  is  the  mother  of  all  error.  Ignorance  is  hardly 
tolerable  in  a  layman,  but  in  a  priest  it  is  inexcusable  and 
unpardonable.''  Who  does  not  know  St.  Basil's  homily  on 
"The  profit  which  young  men  may  derive  from  the  read- 
ing of  profane  authors?"  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  St.  John 
Clirysostom,  St.  Jerome  were  of  like  opinion,  and  employed 
their  leisure  in  spreading  knowledge  in  the  society  which 
they  were  endeavoring  to  win  to  God.    ''The  first  of  bless- 


552  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

ings,"  says  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  one  of  the  greatest 
Doctors  of  the  Church,  ' '  is  knowledge ;  and  I  mean  not  only 
that  which  relates  to  salvation  and  the  beauty  of  spiritual 
things,  I  speak  also  of  profane  knowledge.  To  have  only 
morahty  or  science  is  to  have  but  one  eye,  but  those  who 
shine  in  both  are  perfect." 

Such  has  also  been  the  theory  and  the  practice  of  the 
Church.  Recently  the  Vatican  Council,  speaking  of  scientific 
studies,  solemnly  declared  in  its  first  dogmatic  constitution 
^'that,  far  from  being  opposed  to  the  study  of  the  arts  and 
the  sciences,  the  Church  assists  and  encourages  them  in 
numerous  ways;  for  she  knows,  and  does  not  despise,  the 
advantages  which  result  from  them  to  the  fife  of  man.  More- 
over, as  sciences  come  from  God,  the  Master  of  all  sciences, 
the  Church  recognizes  that  the  regular  employment  of  them 
should,  with  the  assistance  of  grace,  lead  man  to  God.  Cer- 
tainly she  does  not  forbid  that  the  sciences,  each  in  its  own 
sphere,  make  use  of  their  proper  principles  and  special 
methods.'^ 

Why,  moreover,  should  the  Church  fear  science?  Has 
she  not  just  proclaimed  by  the  authentic  organ  of  the  same 
Council  that  no  real  conflict  is  possible  between  natural  truth 
and  revealed  truth,  between  human  science  and  the  re- 
vealed word,  between  faith  and  reason?  We  ourselves  have 
demonstrated  in  the  first  part  of  this  work  that  no  such 
conflict  exists.  God  is  the  author  of  all  being,  and  therefore 
the  author  of  all  truths,  whatever  the  order  to  which  they 
belong. 

2.  Not  content  with  promoting  all  that  can  extend  the 
sphere  of  human  knowledge,  the  Church  has  always  been 
the  most  ardent  centre  of  intellectual  activity.  ''From  the 
fourth  century,''  says  the  Protestant  Guizot,  "the  intellectual 
state  of  religious  society  and  that  of  civil  society  could  not 
be  compared:  in  one  all  was  decadence,  languor,  and  inertia; 
in  the  other  movement,  ardor,  and  progress.''  In  the  bosom 
of  Christianity  minds  were  unceasingly  quickened  by  serious 


THE   CHUECH   AND   CIVILIZATION.  553 

and  profound  discussions.  The  accepted  maxim:  In  neces- 
sariis  unitas,  in  dubiis  libertas,  was  largely  practised.  ''Ex- 
amine the  government  of  the  Church/'  writes  the  same 
author  again;  ''it  appeals  unceasingly  to  reason;  liberty 
dominates.  What  are  its  institutions,  its  means  of  action? 
Provincial  councils,  national  (plenary)  councils,  general  coun- 
cils, continued  correspondence,  continual  publication  of  letters, 
admonitions,  writings.  Never  did  government  carry  common 
discussion  and  dehberation  so  far."  It  was  in  the  general 
councils,  particularly,  that  this  intellectual  life  was  mani- 
fested, and  we  may  say  with  a  writer  that  "even  had  their 
decisions  not  been  the  work  of  divine  inspiration  they  would 
still  remain  as  the  most  beautiful  monuments  of  human 
wisdom."    (M.  de  Decker,  UEglise  et  Vordre  social  chretien.) 

"The  old  world  is  no  more,"  says  a  judicious  writer,  "but 
its  learning  has  survived  it.  The  Church  has  made  her  own 
the  two  languages  which  were  the  instruments  of  its  thought 
and  the  vehicle  of  its  knowledge:  in  appropriating  them 
she  has  immortalized  them,  and  in  immortahzing  them 
she  saved  the  ideas  with  which  they  were  impregnated, 
the  notions  of  which  they  were  the  receptacle,  in  a  word, 
all  the  intellectual  treasure  amassed  in  them;  for  a  language 
is  like  a  stream  of  running  water  which  holds  in  suspension 
all  the  elements  of  the  Hfe  of  a  people."  {De  VEglise  dans 
ses  rapports  avec  le  developpement  intellectual,  by  the  Abbe 
Pirenne.) 

3.  What  a  magnificent  array  of  thinkers  and  writers  is 
offered  us  in  the  annals  of  the  Church!  She  had  hardly 
emerged  from  the  catacombs,  this  Church  based  on  the 
inspired  books  of  the  Old  and  the  New  Testament,  than  there 
rose  for  her  defence  men  hke  Origen,  Athenagoras,  Justin, 
Tertullian;  later  she  produced  the  works  of  writers  like 
John  Chrysostom,  Basil,  Gregory  Nazianzen,  Jerome, 
Ambrose,  Augustine,  and  Leo  the  Great;  later  still  she 
inspired  the  masterpieces  of  Albert  the  Great,  of  Anselm,  of 
Bonaventure,  of  Thomas  Aquinas.     Who  may  count  the  re- 


554  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

markable  works,  published  in  every  language,  setting  forth, 
demonstrating,  developing,  and  defining  religious  truth?  We 
cannot  forget  that  the  most  beautiful  literary  works  of  every 
kind  are  due  to  Christian  inspiration ;  to  be  convinced  of  this 
it  suffices  to  mention  '^ Jerusalem  Delivered,"  ''The  Divine 
Comedy,"  "Polyeucte,"  and  ''Athalie."  If  paganism  had 
its  century  of  Pericles  and  Augustus,  Christianity  produced 
that  of  Leo  XIII.  and  Louis  XIV.;  if  the  first  excelled 
especially  in  Hterary  form,  the  others  surpassed  them  in 
truth  and  elevation  of  thought,  and  in  heroic  sentiments. 

4.  Historians  who  have  made  a  serious  study  of  the  Middle 
Ages^  justly  affirm  that  during  this  long  period  the  in- 
fluence of  the  Church  was  the  only  thing  which  held  its 
own,  and  which  exercised  its  empire  in  the  intellectual 
world.  ''The  Church,"  says  Guizot  himself,  "exercised  a 
great  influence  over  the  moral  and  intellectual  order  in 
Europe.  .  .  .  The  moral  and  intellectual  developments  of 
Europe  have  been  essentially  theological."  It  was  this 
development  of  minds  which  rendered  possible  the  literary 
works  of  the  beautiful  Christian  centuries,  as  well  as  the 
great  scientific  discoveries  at  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  century, 
and  those  which  followed  as  a  consequence  in  later  centuries. 

Had  the  Church  done  nothing  more  than  save  the  master- 
pieces of  pagan  literature,  she  would  still  merit  the  gratitude 
of  all.  When  Europe  was  sacked  by  barbarous  powers  and  be- 
held all  her  Hbraries  destroyed,  it  was  the  monks  who  rescued 
from  fire  and  pillage  the  manuscripts  which  we  stifl  possess. 

^  On  the  work  of  the  Church  in  the  Middle  Ages  see  Digby;  Mait- 
land;  Allies,  vol.  iv.  ff.;  Thebaud,  Church  and  Moral  World,  ch.  6,  7; 
Lilly,  Chapters,  vol.  i.,  Claims,  etc.,  ch.  4;  Alnatt,  Which  is  the  True 
Church,  suppL;  Shahan,  Catholicism  in  the  Middle  Ages;  Br.  W.  x., 
xii.;  Hergenrother,  Cath.  Church,  etc.,  vol.  i.,  Essay  6;  Parsons,  Studies, 
II.,  ch.  1;  A.  C.  Q.  xiii,  589;  C.  W.  v.  207,  397  (libraries,  universities), 
xxiii.  79  (commerce),  xxv.  459,  xxix.  358,  xxxii.  262,  354,  650  (edu- 
cation),  xxxiii.  377  (female  education) ;  D.  R.  Old  Ser.  xvii.  159,  xxviii. 
50,  XXX.  273,  New  Ser.  xix.  294,  xxviii.  378  (how  to  study  the  M.  A.) ; 
L  E.  R.,  Dec.  '99  (morality). 


THE   CHURCH   AND   CIVILIZATION.  555 

And  when  there  was  no  means  of  multiplying  these  works,  these 
same  monks,  in  their  cells  or  in  the  scriptorium,  transcribed 
them  and  spread  numerous  copies.  They  devoted  to  these 
labors  the  leisure  left  them  from  the  education  of  children 
and  of  young  men,  from  the  cultivating  and  redeeming  of 
lands,  and  from  the  construction  of  many  of  the  magnificent 
cathedrals  which  are  to  be  found  in  Europe. 

Much  might  be  said  in  regard  to  other  services  of  every 
kind  wliich  the  monasteries  rendered  society.  While 
Guizot  affirms  that  the  Benedictines  cultivated  the  soil 
of  Europe,  the  rationalist  Gibbon  declares  that  ''one  convent 
of  these  religious  probably  did  more  for  letters  than  the  two 
universities  of  Oxford  and  Cambridge."  ''An  abbey,"  says 
A.  Thierry,  "was  not  only  a  place  of  prayer  and  contempla- 
tion, but  it  was  also  a  pubhc  asylum  against  the  invasion 
of  barbarism.  Beside  being  a  refuge  for  books  and  the 
sciences,  it  contained  workshops  of  every  kind,  and  its  lands 
were  model  farms.  It  was  the  school  to  which  the  con- 
querors came  to  learn  how  to  cultivate  and  colonize  the 
lands  they  had  acquired."^ 

5.  And  the  Popes  particularly,  what  have  they  not  done 
for  intellectual  culture?  "I  should  never  conclude,"  says 
Mgr.  Freppel,  "if  I  were  to  enumerate  all  the  services  ren- 
dered by  the  papacy  to  the  cause  of  science  and  letters. 
Shall  I  point  out  to  you  a  Pope  at  the  head  of  the  Latin 
and  Greek  renaissance;  the  refugees  from  Constantinople 
seeking  protection  under  the  shadow  of  the  pontifical  throne ; 
Lascaris  teaching  Greek  to  astonished  Europe  on  the  Esquiline 
beside  the  palace  of  Leo  X. ;  Nicholas  V.  maintaining  a  legion 
of  scholars  for  the  collection  of  manuscripts  in  all  parts  of 
the  world;  Pius  11. ,  the  learned  ^neas  Sj^lvius,  mingling  his 
own  knowledge  with  the  brilliant  lights  of  his  proteges? 

*  Montalembert;  Feasey;  Belloc;  Henry;  Newman,  Hist.  Sketches, 
IL,ch.  3.4;  Allies,  viii.;  Balmes,ch.  38-47;  Gasquet,  The  Engl.  Bible, 
ch.  6  ff.  (on  Convent  Schools);  Lacordaire,  1.  c,  conf.  36;  A.  C.  Q.  vii. 
331,  xi.  597;  D.  R.  Old  Ser.  xvii.  376,  xxx.  272. 


556  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

And  to  come  nearer  to  our  own  day,  shall  T  cite  Paul  III. 
encouraging  Copernicus  in  his  immortal  discoveries;  Gregory 
XIII.  furnishing  from  astronomy  a  more  accurate  distribu- 
tion of  time;  Sixtus  V.  developing  that  Vatican  library  which 
has  been  the  admiration  of  the  world;  Urban  VIII.,  whose 
Latin  poems  are  justly  regarded  as  among  the  best  produc- 
tions of  the  kind  in  modern  times;  and,  finally,  that  grand 
Benedict  XIV.,  to  whom  Voltaire  himself  renders  homage, 
haihng  him  as  the  most  learned  man  of  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury? "  Each  one's  thoughts  naturally  turn  here  to  the  Pope 
gloriously  reigning,  who  by  his  learning,  his  writings,  and 
his  works  leads  the  march  of  contemporary  civiHzation. 
Who  does  not  know  the  admirable  zeal  with  which  Leo  XIII. 
favors  and  recommends  the  higher  studies,  whether  in 
hterature,  language,  natural  science,  history,  philosophy, 
theology,  in  a  word,  in  all  the  branches  of  human  knowledge? 
''Nothing,"  he  wrote  recently,  ''is  more  noble  than  literary 
glory."  Thus  he  earnestly  extols  the  study  of  Roman 
and  Greek  authors.  "The  models  of  Greece,"  he  says, 
"shine  and  excel  to  such  an  extent,  and  in  every  respect, 
that  one  cannot  conceive  of  anything  more  polished  and 
more  perfect."  The  end  the  Holy  Father  has  in  view  is 
evident;  it  is,  as  he  himself  says,  "that  truth  enlightened 
by  the  splendor  of  thought  and  style  may  more  easily  pene- 
trate, and  be  more  deeply  graven  in  minds."  Moreover, 
his  grand  intelligence  and  noble  heart  are  keenly  interested 
in  all  that  can  contribute  to  the  elevation  and  to  the  welfare 
of  humanity.^ 
It  is,  therefore,  a  historical  fact  that  in  every  period  of  the 

*  There  is,  however,  a  science  which  Leo  XIII.  condemns,  the 
science  which  plunges  into  matter  and  proclaims  it  eternal;  the 
science  which  reduces  man  to  the  level  of  the  brute,  and  which  by 
its  extravagances  shakes  the  foundation  of  all  moral,  domestic,  and 
civil  order.  There  is  also  a  civilization  which  the  Pope  repudiates: 
"  It  is  certainly  not  that  by  which  man  is  perfected  in  the  threefold 
manner  we  have  mentioned;  no,  it  cannot  be  that,  since  the  Church, 
so  far  from  contesting  it,  lends  it  her  most  efficacious  concurrence.     It 


THE   CHURCH  AND   CIVILIZATION.  557 

Christian  worid  the  papacy  has  always  presided  over  scien- 
tific and  literary  movements,  just  as  it  has  been  at  the 
head  of  rehgious  and  social  movements.^ 

II.    The  Church  and  the  Fine  Arts.^ 

In  regard  to  the  Church's  influence  on  the  progress  of  the 
fine  arts,  we  must  needs  confine  ourselves  to  a  few  brief  but 
significant  words.  ''Take  away  the  monuments  of  Christian 
art  from  the  time  of  the  catacombs  to  the  present  day;  ehmi- 
nate  from  public  and  private  collections  all  the  marvels  of 
painting  and  sculpture  due  to  Christian  genius,  and  you  will 
have,"  as  Armengaud  justly  observes  in  his  Les  ceuvres  de 
r art  Chretien,  ''the  best  proof  of  this  fact,  viz.,  that  religion 
was  the  sole  inspiration  of  great  art,  the  founder  of  all  the 
rival  schools,  and  the  nursing  mother  of  artists.  It  belonged 
to  her  and  to  her  alone  to  complete  the  sublime  beauty  of 
pagan  form  by  the  still  more  subhme  beauty  of  Christian 
sentiment:  ancient  art  had  deified  matter,  modem  art  has 
breathed  into  a  soul."  And  to  cite  only  Italy,  look  at  the 
glorious  array  of  Christian  painters  who  made  the  age  from 
Leo  X.  to  Urban  VIII.  illustrious:  Fra  Bartolomeo,  Leonardo 
da  Vinci,  Raphael,  Perugino,  Andrea  del  Sarto,  Correggio, 
Giuho  Romano,  Daniel  de  Volterra,  Michael  Angelo,  Palma 
the  elder,  Titian,  Paul  Veronese,  Tintoretto,  the  Caravaggios, 
Guido,  and  Domenichino.  Was  it  not  Canova,  the  great 
modern  sculptor,  who  wrote  Napoleon:  "All  religions  foster 
art,  but  none  in  the  same  degree  as  ours"?    After  a  period 

is  a  civilization  which  would  supplant  Christianity  and  destroy  with 
it  all  the  good  with  which  it  has  enriched  us." 

^  On  the  Renaissance  see  Pastor,  vol.  i.,  Introd.;  Lilly,  Claims,  etc., 
ch.  5;  C.  T.  S.,  vol.  45;  Einstein. 

'  Rio;  Wiseman,  Essays,  vol.  vi.;  Kenrick,  1.  c.,§  1 ;  Spalding,  J.  M., 
Miscell.,  Essay  4;  Spalding,  J.  L.,  Essays,  p.  306;  A.  C.  Q.  ix.  625, 
xiv.  234,  XV.  228;  C.  W.  i.  246,  iv.  546,  v.,  xv.  518,  xxxv.  133,  xlv. 
398,  lxxi.815;  D.R.  NewSer.  iii.  402,  xi.  234;  M.,  July  1900,  Febr. 
1901. 


558  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

of  lamentable  indifference,  our  age  cannot  now  extol  suffi- 
ciently the  marvels  of  architecture,  of  sculpture,  and  of 
painting  of  the  Middle  Ages.  We  justly  admire  the  grave 
and  touching  melodies  of  the  Gregorian  chant,  and  the 
learned  compositions  of  Orlando  de  Lassus,  of  Palestrina, 
of  Allegri.  A  master  on  hearing  them  in  the  Sistine  Chapel 
exclaimed:  ''I  have  been  listening  to  the  angels,  and  repeat- 
ing what  they  sang.^' 

Wliile  the  Church  thus  gave  souls,  with  the  possession 
of  truth,  the  sentiment  of  the  beautiful  and  the  desire  to 
express  it  in  art,  the  reformers  of  the  sixteenth  century 
seeing  only  superstition  in  the  pomp  of  our  altars,  idolatry 
in  the  numerous  masterpieces  which  adorned  our  churches, 
remorselessly  destroyed  these  marvels  of  Catholic  art.  ''The 
Reformation,"  says  Chateaubriand,  ''penetrated  with  the 
spirit  of  its  founder,  an  envious  and  barbarous  monk,  de- 
clared itself  the  enemy  of  the  arts.  In  withdrawing  the 
imagination  from  the  faculties  of  man,  it  cut  the  wings 
of  genius  and  arrested  its  flights.  ...  If  the  Reformation 
had  been  completely  successful  in  the  beginning,  it  would 
have  established,  at  least  for  a  time,  another  species  of  bar- 
barism. .  .  .  Europe,  in  fact  the  whole  world,  is  covered  with 
monuments  of  the  Catholic  religion.  We  owe  it  this  Gothic 
architecture  which  equals  in  details  and  surpasses  in  grandeur 
the  monuments  of  Greece." 

III.  The  Church  and  Education.* 

I.    POPULAR    EDUCATION. 

Reli^ous  and  moral  teaching  forms  the  basis  of  all  true 
civilization,  or  rather  of  society  itself.  If  it  does  not  rest 
upon  certain  fundamental  truths,  admitted  and  practised 
by  the  masses,  not  only  the  prosperity  but  the  very  existence 
of   society  is  constantly  endangered.     This  is  particularly 

*  See  references  above,  p.  550. 


THE    CHURCH    AND    CIVILIZATION.  559 

true  in  the  troubled  times  in  which  we  hve.  Victor  Hugo 
himself  bears  witness  to  this  truth  in  his  address  to  the 
national  assembly,  Jan.  15,  1850.  ''Rehgious  teaching,"  he 
says,  ''is,  in  my  opinion,  more  necessary  to-day  than  ever. 
The  more  a  man  advances,  the  more  he .  should  believe. 
The  evil,  I  might  almost  say  the  one  evil  of  our  time,  is  a 
tendency  to  stake  all  on  this  present  life.  In  making  tem- 
poral, material  Kfe  the  object  and  end  of  man  we  aggravate 
all  his  miseries  by  the  negation  which  this  imphes:  to  the 
burden  of  misfortune  we  add  the  insupportable  weight  of 
future  nothingness,  and  that  which  was  only  suffering,  that 
is,  a  law  ordained  of  God,  becomes  despair,  that  is,  the  law 
which  reigns  in  hell.  Hence  the  great  social  convulsions  of 
the  day.  Certainly,  I  am  of  those  who  desire  to  alleviate  in 
this  life  the  material  condition  of  those  who  suffer;  but  I  do 
not  forget  that  the  first  means  of  alleviation  is  to  give  them 
hope.  How  our  finite  miseries  diminish  when  we  are  sus- 
tained by  an  infinite  hope!  The  duty  of  us  all,  whether 
legislators,  bishops,  priests,  writers,  is  ...  to  make  all 
look  up  to  heaven,  to  direct  all  souls,  to  turn  all  expectations 
toward  a  future  life,  where  justice  will  be  done,  where  wrongs 
will  be  righted.  Let  us  clearly  proclaim  it :  no  one  will  have 
suffered  unjustly  or  in  vain.  Let  us  not  forget,  and  let  us 
impress  upon  all  that  hfe  would  be  robbed  of  its  dignity, 
it  would  not  be  worth  Hving  if  all  ended  with  this  world,  if 
annihilation  were  to  be  our  lot.  That  which  lightens  labor, 
which  sanctifies  work,  which  makes  man  good,  wise,  patient, 
benevolent,  just,  and  at  the  same  time  humble  and  great, 
worthy  of  intelligence,  worthy  of  liberty,  is  having  before 
him  the  perpetual  vision  of  a  better  world  shining  through 
the  darkness  of  this  life."^     There  are  men,  nevertheless, 

^"Fly,"  says  J.  J.  Rousseau  himself,  "fly  those  who,  under  pre- 
text of  explaining  nature,  sow  desolating  doctrines  in  the  hearts  of 
men.  Overturning,  destroying,  trampling  under  foot  all  that  men 
respect,  they  rob  the  afflicted  of  their  last  consolation  in  their  misery; 
they  take  from  the  powerful  and  the  rich  the  only  curbs  of  their 


560  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

who  think  otherwise :  bhnding  themselves  to  the  truth,  they 
can  conceive  of  no  salvation  for  peoples  save  through  the 
spread  of  letters  and  science.  Yet  if  they  are  in  good  faith, 
they  must  recognize  that,  even  on  this  ground,  the  Church 
deserves  the  gratitude  of  all  who  are  friends  of  the  people. 

There  is,  in  effect,  no  historical  fact  more  solidly  estab- 
lished than  that  of  the  Church's  care  for  the  instruction  of 
the  masses. 

1.  What  is  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  but  a  marvellously 
efficacious  means  of  intellectual  culture  for  nations?  We 
have  said  elsewhere  that  preaching  is  essential  to  the  Church. 
For  by  means  of  it  the  heavenly  doctrine  is  spread  through- 
out the  world.  ^  What  had  been  said  of  the  prophet  Christ 
applied  to  Himself:  The  spirit  of  the  Lord  has  sent  Me 
to  preach  the  Gospel  to  the  poor  (Luke  iv.  17  ff.)-  And 
His  apostohc  life  was  a  continual  preaching  to  the  multitude. 
His  disciples,  after  His  example,  went  through  the  world 
announcing  the  truth  which  enlightens  and  purifies.  ''Woe 
is  unto  me  if  I  preach  not  the  Gospel,"  exclaims  the  Apostle 
of  nations  (1  Cor.  ix.  16.  See  also  Rom.  x.  18,  where  Ps. 
xviii.  5  is  applied  to  the  Apostles).  "There  is  no  reUgion," 
says  Bergier,  ''which  has  inspired  its  followers  with  so  much 
zeal  for  the  instruction  of  the  ignorant  as  Christianity;  none 
which  has  produced  such  a  large  number  of  scholars;  with 
the  exception  of  Christian  nations,  nearly  all  are  still  ignorant 
and  barbarous;  those  who  have  had  the  misfortune  to  re- 
passions;  they  wrest  from  the  depths  of  hearts  remorse  for  crime  and 
hope  of  virtue,  and  yet  boast  that  they  are  the  benefactors  of  the 
human  race.  Truth,  they  protest,  can  never  be  harmful  to  men.  I 
agree  with  them.  And  this,  in  my  opinion,  is  a  great  proof  that  what 
they  teach  is  not  the  truth." 

^  On  Catholic  and  Protestant  missions  see  Wiseman,  Lect.  on  Doc- 
trines of  the  Ch.,  11.  6,  7;  Marshall,  Christ.  Missions;  Alzog,  Ch.  Hist., 
III.,  p.  401  ff.;  921  ff.;  Card.  Moran  in  C.  T.  S.  xxix.;  the  interesting 
articles  by  Rev.  A.  H.  Atteridge,  S.J.,  in  D.  R.  July  '84,  Apr.  '85, 
Jan. '87,  Jan.,  Oct.  '89;  Archbp.  Spalding,  Evidences,  1.  4;  A.  C.  Q. 
Oct.  1901. 


THE   CHURCH   AND   CIVILIZATION.  561 

nounce  Christianity  have  promptly  relapsed  into  barbarism." 
And  this  phenomenon  is  all  the  more  remarkable  that,  as 
Ozanam  justly  observes,  paganism  was  never  preached;  never 
did  the  ancient  reUgions  speak  to  the  people  assembled  in 
their  temples.^  Now  it  cannot  be  disputed  that  the  knowl- 
edge of  religious  truths  taught  by  the  Church  constitutes, 
of  itself,  the  richest  treasure  of  the  intelligence.  The 
catechism,  it  has  been  justly  said,  is  the  philosophy  of 
the  people.  Theodore  Jouffroy,  one  of  the  representatives 
of  infidel  philosophy,  could  not  but  acknowledge  this.  Hear 
what  he  said  to  his  numerous  auditors  at  the  Sorbonne,  speak- 
ing of  the  summary  of  Cathohc  doctrine.  ^' There  is  a  Httle 
book  which  children  are  taught,  and  upon  which  they  are 
questioned  at  church;  read  this  little  book,  which  is  the 
Catechism:  you  will  find  in  it  a  solution  of  all  the  questions 
I  have  proposed  to  you,  of  all  without  exception.  Ask  the 
Christian  the  origin  of  human  species,  ask  whither  he  is 
going,  how  he  is  going,  he  will  tell  you.  Ask  that  poor 
child  why  he  is  on  this  earth,  what  is  to  become  of  him  after 
his  death :  he  will  give  you  a  subhme  reply,  which  he  will  not 
imderstand,  but  which  is  no  less  admirable.  Ask  him  how 
the  world  was  created  and  for  what  end;  why  God  placed  in 
it  animals  and  plants;  how  the  earth  was  peopled,  whether 
by  one  family  or  by  many;  why  men  speak  several  languages; 
why  they  suffer;  why  they  struggle,  and  how  all  tliis  is  to 
end:  again  he  will  tell  you.  Ask  him  concerning  the  origin 
of  the  world  and  the  origin  of  species,  questions  of  race,  the 
destiny  of  man  in  this  fife  and  in  the  next,  man's  relations 
with  God,  the  duties  of  man  toward  his  fellow  creatures,  the 
rights  of  man  over  creation :  he  will  be  equally  able  to  answer. 
And  when  he  is  a  man  he  will  hesitate  no  less  concerning 
natural  right,  political  right,  international  right,  for  all  this 
comes,  flows  clearly,  as  of  itself,  from  Christianity.  This  is 
what  I  call  a  grand  religion ;  I  recognize  it  by  this  sign :  that 
it  leaves  unanswered  no  question  which  interests  humanity.'' 

^  See  the  beautiful  pages  of  Lacordaire,  conf.  24  on  Cath.  Doc, 


562  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

2.  Wherever  the  Church  has  raised  a  temple  she  has  huilt  a 
school.  All  authors  who  have  written  on  the  beginnings  of  the 
Church  are  unanimous  in  pointing  out  the  existence  in  the  first 
centuries  of  a  cathedral  school  in  each  diocese.  The  Anglican 
Bingham  in  his  celebrated  book  on  Ecclesiastical  Antiquities, 
the  learned  Thomassin  in  his  still  more  celebrated  work, 
''Ancient  and  Modern  Ecclesiastical  Discipline,"  Launoi, 
Lingard,  Louis  Nardi,  and  a  multitude  of  others  make  this  very- 
clear.  The  learned  Benedictine  authors  of  VHistoire  litteraire 
de  la  France,  writing  of  the  state  of  letters  in  Gaul  in  the  first 
centuries,  say  that  "a  Christian  school  invariably  followed 
the  erection  of  a  parish  church."  And  after  relating  how 
''the  Church  and  monastic  orders  in  the  sixth  century  were 
the  harbors  where  all  that  remained  of  letters  and  sciences 
were  saved  from  total  shipwreck,"  they  add:  "  The  cathedrals 
still  had  their  schools  where  the  same  method  of  teaching  was 
followed  as  in  the  early  centuries.' '  It  is  to  be  noted  that 
before  the  triumph  of  the  Church  imder  Constantine  there 
were  no  parochial  churches,  only  bishoprics:  the  flock  was 
governed  directly  by  the  bishop  assisted  by  a  few  priests. 
Later,  when  dioceses  were  divided  into  parishes,  parochial 
schools  were  added  to  the  cathedral  schools. 

To  appreciate  the  interest  which  the  Church  has  always 
taken  in  the  education  and  instruction  of  the  people,  we  have 
only  to  open  a  collection  of  the  Councils.  At  every  period 
we  find  these  learned  and  holy  assemblies  occupied  with  the 
question  of  education,  and  recommending  it  to  the  enlightened 
care  of  pastors  of  souls.  In  the  sixth  century  the  Council  of 
Vaison  cites  the  example,  already  old,  of  Italy,  to  remind  the 
priests  of  Gaul  of  their  grave  obhgation  to  elevate  and 
instruct  youth.  In  the  eighth  century  we  find  Theodulf, 
Bishop  of  Orleans,  beloved  by  Charlemagne  for  his  learning 
and  his  virtues,  issuing  the  following  decree,  which  is  repro- 
duced word  for  word  in  the  capitularies  or  ecclesiastical 
statutes  of  England  of  that  time:  "Let  the  priests  maintain 
schools  in  the  market-towns  and  in   the  country;    and  if 


THE   CHURCH   AND   CIVILIZATION.  563 

any  of  the  faithful  wish  to  entrust  their  little  children 
to  them  to  be  instructed  in  letters,  let  them  not  refuse 
to  receive  and  instruct  them;  but,  on  the  contrary,  let 
them  teach  them  with  perfect  charity.  And  in  instructing 
the  children  let  them  require  no  salary,  and  receive  nothing 
except  whatever  the  parents  voluntarily  offer  through  affec- 
tion and  gratitude." 

We  might  cite  a  number  of  other  Councils,  for  example, 
that  of  Aix-la-Chapelle  in  789,  of  Thionville  in  805,  of  Mayence 
in  813,  of  Rome  in  826,  of  Paris  in  829,  of  Valence  in  885, 
all  of  which  spoke  in  analogous  terms. 

Charlemagne  was  most  anxious  for  the  education  of  his 
people.  Ansegis,  Abbot  of  St.  Vandrille,  says,  in  his  collec- 
tion of  the  great  Christian  emperor's  capitularies:  ''Charle- 
magne desired  that  there  be  schools  in  all  the  monasteries 
and  in  all  the  bishoprics  in  order  that  the  children  of  free 
men  as  well  as  those  of  serfs  be  taught  grammar,  music,  and 
arithmetic." 

We  would  also  mention  the  eighteenth  canon  of  the  Third 
Ecumenical  Council  of  Lateran,  held  in  1171.  Addressed  to 
the  universal  Church,  it  faithfully  expresses  the  thought 
of  the  Church  herself:  ''The  Church  like  a  pious  mother  is 
bound  to  see  that  the  poor  whose  parents  cannot  afford 
to  educate  them  shall  not,  for  this  reason,  be  deprived  of 
facilities  for  learning  and  making  progress  in  letters  and 
science;  therefore,  we  command  that  in  all  the  cathedrals 
a  master  with  a  suitable  salary  be  provided  for  the  free  in- 
struction of  clerks  and  all  poor  scholars.^' 

In  fact,  as  Allain  says  in  his  erudite  work,  Uinstrudion 
primaire  en  France  avant  la  revolution,  "  the  history  of  educa- 
tion of  every  degree  in  the  early  part  of  the  Middle  Ages  is 
simply  the  history  of  the  Church's  efforts  to  preserve  the 
sciences,  and  to  save  the  threatened  civilization.  From  the 
fifth  to  the  twelfth  century  the  clergy  alone  were  occupied 
with  questions  relating  to  education;  and  if  we  would  have 
an  idea  of  the  intellectual  state  of  our  fathers  in  those  remote 


564  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

periods,  we  must  have  recourse  to  the  ecclesiastical  records, 
we  must  study  the  Councils." 

The  same  state  of  affairs  prevailed  in  Germany  as  in  France. 
In  a  work  entitled  U instruction  populaire  dans  V AlUmagne, 
du  Nord,  Rendu,  Inspector-General  of  the  University  of 
France,  speaking  of  the  time  preceding  the  Revolution, 
expresses  himself  thus:  "Catholicism  had  peopled  Germany 
with  popular  schools  like  the  rest  of  Europe;  it  required 
that  the  clergy  call  to  these  schools  the  children  of  serfs  as 
well  as  free  men;  that  every  priest  having  charge  of  souls 
should  give  instruction  himself,  or  have  it  given  by  a  clerk; 
that  the  bishops,  in  their  turn^  should  take  care  to  build 
schools  where  there  were  none;  that  the  curate  of  each 
parish  should  offer  the  poor  free  instruction.  Cathohcism 
did  more;  anticipating  the  thought  of  J.  B.  de  la  Salle,  the 
disciples  of  Gerard  Van  Groote  taught  poor  children  writing^ 
reading,  religion,  and  a  few  mechanical  arts.  From  the 
Netherlands,  their  native  country,  this  brotherhood  of  the 
fourteenth  century  carried  the  light  of  their  charity  to  both 
shores  of  the  Rhine,  to  Westphalia,  to  Saxony^  to  Pomerania, 
to  Prussia  and  Silesia.  At  the  same  time,  monasteries  of 
women  had  provided  the  young  girls  of  the  people  with 
teachers  which  the  Reformation  took  from  them.  .  .  .  Thus 
Cathohcism  had  laid  the  corner-stone  of  popular  education 
as  well  as  of  higher  culture." 

It  is  not  astonishing,  therefore,  that  in  the  sixteenth 
century  the  Council  of  Trent  found  nothing  to  change  in  the 
work  of  the  education  of  the  people,  and  that  it  was  content 
to  give  it  its  final  perfection  by  the  creation  of  the  Petits 
Seminaires. 

The  work  of  popular  instruction  by  no  means  declined  in 
the  two  centuries  that  followed.  Before  1789  France,  for 
example,  was  covered  with  schools  for  the  instruction  of  the 
people.  Paris  alone  had  at  least  five  hundred.  Even  the 
small  villages  were  not  without  them,  as  we  learn  from  the 
terms  of  article  twenty-five  of  the  edict  of  1695:    ''The 


THE   CHURCH   AND   CIVILIZATION.  565 

superintendents,  preceptors,  masters,  and  mistresses  in  the 
small  villages  shall  be  approved  by  the  curates  of  the  parishes, 
or  other  ecclesiastics  empowered  to  do  so."  In  1771  Guy 
de  Rousseau  de  Lacombe,  advocate  of  the  Parliament  of 
Paris,  writes:  ''Our  late  kings  have  united  in  their  ordi- 
nances the  dispositions  of  their  predecessors  and  those  of  the 
Councils,  and  finding  schools  established  almost  everywhere, 
they  have  been  watchful  to  maintain  their  discipline  and  to 
have  them  well  attended."  ''Each  parish  usually  has," 
says  Daniel  Jousse  in  a  treatise  written  in  1709,  "two  charity 
schools  for  poor  children,  one  for  boys  and  one  for  girls." 

In  a  learned  work  of  Ch.  de  Robillard  de  Beaurepaire,  the 
fruit  of  patient  research,  we  find  that  in  the  ancient  diocese 
of  Rouen  there  were  835  schools  for  boys  and  306  schools 
for  girls,  dispersed  through  the  1159  parishes  visited  by  Mgr. 
d'Aubigne.  Analogous  works  attest  the  same  care  on  the 
part  of  the  Church  for  the  other  dioceses  of  France. 

In  concluding  the  ninth  chapter,  entitled  UEglise  et 
V instruction  primaire,  M.  Allain  expresses  himself  in  the 
following  terms:  "Whoever  shall  have  read  dispassionately 
these  extracts  from  our  ancient  synodal  ordinances  will  be 
convinced,  I  hope,  of  the  zeal  with  which  the  Church  labored 
for  the  diffusion  of  primary  education,  and  of  the  profound 
wisdom  of  the  regulations  she  made  for  masters  and  scholars. 
The  diocesan  statutes  of  the  last  two  centuries  are  an  im- 
perishable monument  of  her  devotion  to  the  interests  of 
education;  they  demonstrate  the  extent  of  her  solicitude 
for  this  important  work  and  the  intelhgent  care  she  bestowed 
on  it.  Those  who  dare  to  say  that  if  anything  was  done  in 
France  for  primary  instruction,  it  was  done  without  the 
Church,  and  in  spite  of  her,  show  that  they  are  absolutely 
ignorant  of  her  legislation  and  her  works." 

What  we  have  said  proclaims  with  eloquence  the  devotion 
of  the  clergy  to  the  great  work  of  popular  education.  Not 
content  with  exhorting,  they  preached  by  example,  per- 
forming the  duties  of  teachers  themselves  at  need,  founding 


566  CHEISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

schools  and  robbing  themselves  to  endow  them.  We  have 
here  striking  and  numerous  facts,  the  authority  of  which  is 
not  weakened  nor  the  memory  effaced  because  there  are 
writers  who  dare  to  assert,  without  the  shadow  of  proof,  that, 
''though  the  Catholic  faith  predominated  for  many  centuries, 
it  did  nothing  toward  founding  primary  schools."  And, 
incredible  as  it  may  seem,  even  the  Revolution  in  its  famous 
preface  to  the  law  of  August  18,  1792,  did  not  hesitate  to 
proclaim  that  ''the  Brothers  (of  the  Christian  Schools) 
merited  well  of  the  country."  Nor  is  this  unequivocal  testi- 
mony astonishing,  for  at  the  death  of  Blessed  de  la  Salle  his 
disciples  had  schools  in  almost  all  the  provinces  of  France, 
and  we  know  that  their  instruction  was  free.  In  fact  it 
was  complained  that  they  were  too  numerous:  "  Our  market 
towns  and  our  villages,"  said  in  1773  the  magistrates  and 
prominent  citizens  of  Saint- Die  "swarm  with  schools;  there 
is  not  a  hamlet  without  its  pedagogue.".  These  are  facts 
which  the  calumniators  of  the  Church  should  not  ignore. 
Perhaps  they  are  also  ignorant  of  Voltaire's  opinion  in  regard 
to  the  education  of  the  masses.  We  shall  confine  ourselves 
to  quoting  the  following  from  a  great  number  of  similar 
sentiments  written  by  this  man  who  so  heartily  despised 
the  people:  "The  laborer  does  not  deserve  to  be  educated; 
it  is  sufficient  for  him  if  he  knows  how  to  handle  the  pick-axe, 
the  plane,  or  the  file."  "  There  must  needs  be  ignorant  beg- 
gars." "The  good  bourgeois,  not  the  workman,  should  be 
educated."  As  to  the  people,  "they  must  be  made  to  wear 
the  yoke  eternally  and  feel  the  goad." 

It  would  be  interesting  to  contrast  the  action  of  the  Church 
with  what  was  done  for  the  education  of  the  people  by  the 
French  Revolution,  which  certain  writers  credit  erroneously 
with  so  many  excellent  things.  But  for  lack  of  space  we 
shall  limit  ourselves  to  saying  that  the  Revolution  began 
in  1792  by  abolishing  all  the  primary  schools  together  with 
the  five  hundred  and  sixty-two  colleges  then  existing;  as  to 
the  universities,  one  only,  that  of  Strasburg,  was  allowed, 


THE  churOh  and  civilization.  567 

because  of  its  Protestantism,  to  remain;  the  twenty-three 
others  were  suppressed.  The  lands  and  revenues  of  these 
institutions  were  of  course  confiscated  and  the  former 
faculty  foimd  themselves  dismissed,  or  obliged  to  apostatize. 
And  what  was  offered  in  their  place?  High-sounding 
decrees,  in  spite  of  which  the  learned  Chaptal,  then  Minister 
of  the  Interior  in  France,  says  in  1801,  ''pubHc  education 
has  almost  ceased;  the  generation  which  has  just  reached 
its  twentieth  year  is  irrevocably  sacrificed  to  ignorance; 
the  primary  schools  have  almost  disappeared.'' 

No  doubt  the  Empire  and  the  succeeding  governments 
endeavored  to  repair  the  evil  caused  by  the  Revolution, 
but  their  labor  consisted  only  in  restoring,  to  a  certain  extent, 
the  ruins  accumulated  by  free  thought.  This  does  not 
justify  them,  however,  in  attacking  the  Church,  which  for 
centuries  had  done  so  much  better  and  so  much  more  for 
the  interests  of  education. 

We  must  not  imagine  that  free  schools  are  an  invention 
of  modem  times.  The  majority  of  the  schools,  colleges, 
and  universities  of  the  Middle  Ages  were  founded  and  main- 
tained by  Catholic  liberality.^ 


II.   UNIVERSITY  AND   COLLEGE   EDUCATION. 

University  Education. — There  is  much  to  be  said  of  the 
important  service  rendered  by  the  Church  to  philosophy, 
hterature,  and  science,  but  we  must  confine  ourselves  to  a 
few  leading  facts.^ 

*The  free  schools  of  those  ages  were  the  result  of  spontaneous 
donations,  and  not,  like  most  of  the  present  day,  supported  by  public 
tax, — an  additional  burden  imposed  alike  upon  the  poor  and  the 
rich,  under  penalty  of  fine  or  imprisonment.  Think  of  the  enormous 
sums  required  every  year  by  the  bureau  of  education  in  most  of  the 
countries  of  Europe! 

'  Cf.  Rashdall's  excellent  work. 


568  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

It  is  well  known  that  all  the  numerous  and  flourishing 
universities  of  the  Middle  Ages  were,  from  the  eleventh  and 
twelfth  century,  founded  by  the  Church,  or  sought  her 
approval  or  protection.  To  be  sure,  they  were  favored  and 
patronized  by  kings,  but  it  is  absolutely  incontestable  that 
they  grew  and  prospered  under  the  shadow  of  the  Holy  See. 
The  Popes  in  the  bulls  of  erection  gave  as  a  reason  therefor 
the  duty  incumbent  upon  them  to  dissipate  the  darkness 
of  ignorance,  to  spread  and  encourage  the  teaching  of  all  the 
sciences.  Hence  the  name.  University,  Universis  scientiis. 
From  the  thirteenth  century  the  Oriental  languages  were 
taught  in  them,  and  in  1311  the  General  Council  of  Vienna 
made  these  studies  obligatory  in  the  principal  universities. 
Let  us  remark  further  that  the  first  collection  for  the  history 
of  natural  sciences  was  due  to  Pope  Pius  V.  (1566-1572), 
and  that  as  early  as  the  thirteenth  century  the  Vatican 
possessed  a  botanical  and  medical  garden. 

While  the  universities  received  their  statutes  and  their 
powers  from  the  Pope,  they  were  justly  proud  of  numbering 
among  their  illustrious  masters  such  men  as  St.  Anselm, 
St.  Bonaventure,  Alexander  de  Hales,  Albert  the  Great, 
Duns  Scotus,  and  St.  Thomas  Aquinas. 

The  number  of  their  scholars  corresponded  to  the  high 
grade  of  the  teaching  given.  In  the  fifteenth  century,  when 
the  Protestant  Reformation  had  overturned  CathoHc  Europe, 
the  Universities  of  Zwolle,  Bois-le-Duc,  Cologne,  Deventer 
nimibered  respectively  800,  1200,  2000,  2200  students.  The 
University  of  Vienna  harbored  3000,  and  even  7000  under 
Maximilian  I. ;  the  University  of  Paris,  it  is  said,  and  that  of 
Cracow  had  as  many  as  15,000.  The  universal  use  of  the 
Latin  tongue  in  the  universities  caused  students  from  all 
parts  of  the  world  to  fiock  to  them.  In  Belgium  the  Univer- 
sity of  Louvain,  founded  in  the  fifteenth  century  by  Martin  V., 
enjoyed  the  most  brilhant  reputation.  According  to  Justus 
Lipsius  it  numbered  from  7000  to  8000  scholars  and  2000 
law  students.    No  poor  scholar  was  refused^  Catholic  charity 


THE  CHURCH  AND  CIVILIZATION.  569 

having  provided  in  advance  for  all  their  needs.  In  this 
city  alone  there  were  more  than  forty  colleges  or  houses 
where  poor  scholars,  conspicuous  for  talent  or  appHcation, 
were  gratuitously  lodged  and  fed.  M.  Laurentie  says  that 
the  single  university  of  Paris  distributed  six  hundred  and 
nineteen  scholarships  founded  by  the  clergy  for  poor 
students. 

Colleges. — As  to  the  colleges,  that  is,  the  schools  which, 
with  rehgion,  included  specially  the  study  of  classic  antiquity, 
they  were  to  be  found  even  in  the  most  unimportant  cities. 
They  were  generally  under  the  administration  of  the  chief 
magistrates,  but  nearly  all  the  instruction  was  given  by  the 
clergy,  who  had,  moreover,  undisputed  right  of  supervision. 
Here  again  it  was  Christian  charity  which  richly  endowed 
these  numerous  establishments,  founded  scholarships,  and 
erected  pubHc  Hbraries. 

We  find  in  the  recent  and  remarkable  work  of  Albert 
Duruy,  U instruction  'puhlique  et  la  revolution,  interesting 
statistics  in  regard  to  our  subject.  We  learn  that  before 
1789  France  with  a  population  of  twenty-five  milUon  in- 
habitants, had  562  colleges  with  72,747  scholars.  About 
40,000  of  this  number  received  gratuitous  or  almost  gratuitous 
instruction.  To-day  the  official  records  show  to  a  popula- 
tion of  thirty-eight  million  inhabitants  only  81  lyceums 
and  325  colleges  with  79,321  scholars;  of  these  only  4949 
receive  scholarships  of  more  or  less  importance.  In  the 
single  province  of  Franche-Comte  there  were  more  scholarships 
than  there  are  to-day  in  all  France.  These  figures  speak 
eloquently  and  dispense  with  all  commentary.  We  see  that 
Chevaher  had  indeed  reason  to  say  that  ''since  the  Revo- 
lution and  the  suppression  of  religious  orders  there  has  been 
a  strange  retrogression  in  regard  to  secondary  education.'' 

Let  us  conclude,  as  the  learned  Hurter  observes  in  his 
History  of  Innocent  III.,  that  ''only  superficial  minds,  who 
have  not  studied  historical  records,  who  are  either  bhnded 
by  the  alleged  superiority  of  their  day,  or  instigated  by 


570  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

persistent  hatred,  dare  to  accuse  the  Church  of  having 
favored  ignorance." 

We  cannot  conclude  this  chapter  better  than  by  quoting 
a  beautiful  page  of  Balmes  in  which,  presenting  a  brief 
picture  of  European  civihzation,  he  shows  the  Church's 
innumerable  claims  to  the  gratitude  of  the  people. 

''The  individual  animated  by  a  lively  sense  of  his  own 
dignity,  abounding  in  activity,  perseverance,  energy,  and 
enjoying  the  simultaneous  development  of  all  his  faculties; 
woman  elevated  to  the  rank  of  the  consort  of  man,  and,  as  it 
were,  recompensed  for  the  duty  of  obedience  by  the  respectful 
affection  lavished  upon  her;  the  gentleness  and  constancy 
of  family  ties,  protected  by  the  powerful  guarantees  of  good 
order  and  justice;  an  admirable  public  conscience,  rich 
in  maxims  of  sublime  morality,  in  laws  of  justice  and  equity, 
in  sentiments  of  honor  and  dignity;  a  conscience  which 
survives  the  shipwreck  of  private  morality,  and  does  not 
allow  unblushing  corruption  to  reach  the  height  which  it 
attained  in  antiquity;  a  general  mildness  of  manners,  which 
in  war  prevents  great  excesses,  and  in  peace  renders  life 
more  tranquil  and  pleasing;  a  profound  respect  for  man  and 
all  that  belongs  to  him,  which  makes  private  acts  of  violence 
very  uncommon,  and  in  all  political  constitutions  serves  as  a 
salutary  check  on  governments;  an  ardent  desire  of  perfec- 
tion in  all  departments;  an  irresistible  tendency,  sometimes 
ill-directed,  but  always  active,  to  improve  the  condition 
of  the  many;  a  secret  impulse  to  protect  the  weak,  to  succor 
the  imfortunate — an  impulse  which  sometimes  pursues  its 
course  with  generous  ardor,  and  which,  whenever  it  is  unable 
to  develop  itself,  remains  in  the  heart  of  society,  and  pro- 
duces there  the  uneasiness  and  disquietude  of  remorse; 
a  cosmopolitan  spirit  of  imiversality,  of  propagandism,  an 
inexhaustible  fund  of  resources  to  grow  again  without  danger 
of  perishing,  and  for  self-preservation  in  the  most  important 
junctures;  a  generous  impatience,  which  longs  to  anticipate 
the  future,  and  produces  an  incessant  movement  and  agita- 


THE   CHURCH  AND   CIVILIZATION.  571 

tion,  sometimes  dangerous,  but  which  are  generally  the 
germs  of  great  benefits,  and  the  symptoms  of  a  strong  principle 
of  life, — such  are  the  great  characteristics  wliich  distinguish 
European  civiHzation;  such  are  the  features  which  place 
it  in  a  rank  immensely  supeiior  to  that  of  all  other  civih- 
zations,  ancient  or  modern." 

GENERAL   CONCLUSION. 

All  honor  to  the  Catholic  Church  our  Mother,  who,  after 
drawing  mankind  from  the  deluge  of  corruption  in  which  it 
was  plimged,  raised  it  a  second  time  from  the  ruins  ac- 
cumulated by  barbarism!  All  honor  to  the  Church  which 
has  so  admirably  moulded  the  gross  elements  placed  under 
her  hand  by  the  irruption  of  the  Germans  and  the  other 
barbarians;  in  fusing  the  new  races  with  the  old,  she  formed 
the  modem  nations  whose  civiHzation  casts  such  a  bright 
light  in  the  world!  All  honor  to  the  Church  whose  entire 
history  relates  and  proclaims  the  beneficent  influence  she 
exercised  from  century  to  century  to  our  own  day!  What 
she  reahzed  in  the  past  by  her  doctrine,  her  laws,  her  institu- 
tions, and  by  the  divine  grace  which  she  communicates  to 
souls,  the  Church  can  and  still  desires  to  realize,  for  she  has 
lost  nothing  of  her  fruitfulness  and  her  immortal  youth. 

Yet,  notwithstanding  these  great  and  inestimable  services, 
the  Church  has  never,  perhaps,  encountered  greater  enmity. 
In  every  part  of  the  globe  simultaneous  and  powerful  attacks 
are  made  upon  her.  Freemasonry,^  centralizing  all  the 
forces  at  the  disposition  of  the  enemies  of  Jesus  Christ,  seems 
to  be  exhausting  all  its  efforts  to  falsify  the  prophecy  which 
proclaims  the  immortality  of  His  divine  work. 

*  On  Freemasonry  see  Leo  XIII.,  Encycl.,  Apr.  20,  1884;  Pachtler, 
The  Secret  Warfare  of  Freemasonry  Against  Church  and  State; 
Dupanloup,  Study  of  Freemasonry;  Parsons,  Studies,  IV.,  ch.  18; 
A.  C.  Q.  239,  vi.  577;  C.  W.  xxii.  145;  M.  li.  305,  474;  I.  E.  R., 
July,  Sept.,  Oct.  '99;  D.  R.  III.  Ser.  xii.  144;  A.  E.  R.,  Dec.  '99, 
Febr.  1900. 


572  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS. 

We  have  no  reason,  however,  despite  this  redoubled 
manifestation  of  rage  and  hatred,  to  be  anxious  as  to  the 
fate  of  the  Church.  Let  us  bear  in  mind  the  words  of  the 
illustrious  St.  Augustine,  uttered  fourteen  hundred  years 
ago.  ''They  behold  the  Church  and  they  say:  'She  is  about 
to  die,  and  even  her  name  will  soon  disappear;  in  a  short 
time  there  will  be  no  more  Christians;  they  have  had  their 
day.'  And  while  they  are  saying  this,  I  see  them  die  every 
day,  and  the  Church  still  remains,  proclaiming  the  power 
of  God  to  succeeding  generations." 

"The  Papacy,"  says,  in  his  turn,  Macaulay,  the  celebrated 
publicist  and  Protestant  historian,  "the  Papacy  remains, 
not  in  decay,  not  a  mere  antique,  but  full  of  hfe  and  useful 
vigor.  Nor  do  we  see  any  sign  which  indicates  that  the 
term  of  her  long  dominion  is  approaching.  She  saw  the 
commencement  of  all  the  governments  and  of  all  the  eccle- 
siastical establishments  that  now  exist  in  the  world;  and  we 
feel  no  assurance  that  she  is  not  destined  to  see  the  end  of 
them  all.  She  was  great  and  respected  before  the  Saxon 
had  set  foot  on  Britain,  before  the  Frank  had  passed  the 
Rhine,  when  Grecian  eloquence  still  flourished  in  Antioch, 
when  idols  were  still  worshipped  in  the  temple  of  Mecca. 
And  she  may  still  exist  in  undiminished  vigor  when  some 
traveller  from  New  Zealand  shall,  in  the  midst  of  a  vast 
sohtude,  take  his  stand  on  a  broken  arch  of  London  Bridge 
to  sketch  the  ruins  of  St.  Paul's." 

Yes;  the  divine  promises  permit  us  to  look  to  the  future 
with  confidence.  The  Church  may  be  persecuted  like  her 
divine  Head;  but  is  she  not  the  Church  militant  here  below? 
Whole  coimtries  may  lose  the  inestimable  benefit  of  the 
faith;  but  what  she  loses  on  the  one  hand.  Providence 
restores  to  her  on  the  other.  What  is  happening  before 
our  eyes  at  this  very  moment?  While  the  persecutions 
excited  by  secret  societies  are  raging  everywhere  against  her, 
the  Church  of  Rome  beholds  the  bonds  of  her  indestructible 
union  growing  ever  stronger;    the  voice  of  the  supreme 


THE    CHURCH   AND    CIVILIZATION.  573 

Pontiff  was  never  heard  with  greater  veneration  and  respect 
by  pastors  and  the  faithful.  And  abroad,  so  far  from  disap- 
pearing, the  Gospel  is  extending  its  conquests  in  a  manner 
truly  consoling.  The  work  of  the  foreign  missions,  interrupted 
by  the  trials  of  the  last  century,  has  received  a  new  im- 
petus. The  Annals  of  the  Propagation  of  the  Faith  attest 
the  marvels  of  contemporaneous  apostolate  in  hitherto  unex- 
plored countries  of  Africa,  in  the  most  savage  islands  of 
Oceanica,  in  the  centre  of  Islamism,  in  the  bosom  of  Asiatic 
idolatry.  To  cite  but  one  instance:  At  the  first  Plenary 
Council  in  Baltimore  in  1852  there  were  six  archbishops  and 
twenty-six  bishops;  at  the  Plenary  Council  of  Baltimore 
held  in  1866  there  were  seven  archbishops  and  thirty-seven 
bishops;  at  the  time  of  the  third  Plenary  Council  in  1884 
in  the  same  city  the  Catholic  Church  of  America  numbered 
twelve  archbishops  and  sixty-three  bishops.  And  now,  at 
the  opening  of  the  twentieth  century,  there  are  within  the 
United  States  fourteen  Cathohc  provinces  and  seventy-five 
dioceses.  Such  is  the  progress  of  the  faith  in  one  country 
during  a  period  of  only  fifty  years. 

Moreover,  the  very  sufferings  of  the  Church  are  a  greater 
reason  for  confidence  in  the  future,  for  the  Church  is  the 
hving  image  of  Jesus  Christ:  Our  Saviour  had  needs  pass 
through  the  agony  of  Gethsemani  before  attaining  the  glory 
of  His  Resurrection.  '^  Ought  not  Christ  to  have  suffered 
these  things,  and  so  to  enter  into  His  glory?  "  (Luke  xxiv.  26.) 

The  fife  of  the  Church  in  the  future,  therefore,  will  be,  as 
in  the  past,  a  perpetual  series  of  alternating  struggles  and 
triumphs,  imtil  the  dawn  of  that  day  marked  by  Providence 
when,  leaving  the  arena  which  has  witnessed  all  her  glorious 
combats,  she  will  introduce  the  last  elect  into  the  heavenly 
Jerusalem. 

On  this  joyful  and  glorious  day  shall  we  be  numbered 
among  the  children  of  the  Church  triumphant?  Shall  we 
have  part  in  the  boundless  and  never-ending  happiness 
which  God  has  prepared  from  the  beginning  for  His  beloved 


574  CHRISTIAN   APOLOGETICS. 

children?  Yes;  it  will  be  ours  if,  during  our  short  pilgrim- 
age in  this  world,  we  have  been  faithful  in  faith  and  works 
to  the  Church  our  Mother;  if,  with  her,  we  have  courageously 
labored,  struggled,  and  suffered  for  the  cause  of  God;  if  at 
our  last  hour  we  can  truly  say,  in  the  words  of  St.  Paul: 
''I  have  fought  the  good  fight,  I  have  finished  my  course, 
I  have  kept  the  faith.  As  to  the  rest,  there  is  laid  up  for 
me  a  crown  of  justice,  which  the  Lord,  the  just  Judge,  will 
render  to  me  in  that  day.''     (2  Tim.  iv.  7,  8.) 


**  CJe  Uortr  (Hlotr  sftall  gibe  unto  Jgi'm  tje 
ttirone  of  Babiti  ^i^  fattier:  anti  f^t  st)all 
tei'gn  in  tt)e  Jouse  of  S^acob  forebec,  ann  of 
?gis  Itingtiom  tfjere  stall  lie  no  enti/'— luke  i. 
32,  33- 


ALPHABETICAL    INDEX. 


Abraham  in  Egypt,  131. 
Abuses  in  Church,  457 ;   of  Inquisi- 
tion, 480 ;  no  proof  against  right, 

507. 
Accusations    against    the    Church, 

432,  457  ff. 
Adam,  prerogatives,  28,  248;   body 

created,  101 ;  his  sin,  246,  248  f. 
Age  of  universe,  75;  organisms,  97; 

man,  99,  117  ff. 
Agnosticism,  25. 
Albigenses,  474. 
Alluvia  and  deltas,  123  f. 
America  peopled,    116;   Church  in 

A.,  573. 
Analogies  between  Christianity  and 

false  religions,  260  f . 
Anarchists,  429. 

Anatomy  of  man  and  ape,  104  f. 
Anglican  schism,  344;  orders,  353; 

persecutions,  463. 
Animals  and  man,  102  ff. 
Annibale,  Card.,  on  spiritism,  180. 
Antipopes,  334. 
Antiquity  of  human  race,  117  ff. ; 

Egypt,   125;   India,    128;  China, 

128  f. ;  Chaldea,  129. 
Ape  and  man,  102  f. 
Apocryphal  gospels,  156. 
Apology,      method     of     Christian, 

161  f. :  CathoUc,  8,  56,  300,  341. 
Apostasy  a  crime,  476. 
Apostles,  their  miracles,   208;   au- 
thority,    318;     privileges,     331; 

successors,  327   ff. ;   A.   and  civil 

power,  413. 
Apostolicity  of  the  Church,  327, 339 ; 

A.  not  in  Protestantism,  352;  nor 

in  Greek  schism,  370. 
Apollonius  of  Thyania,  179. 
Arbitration,  papal,  51.3. 
Ark  of  Noe.  84  f. 


575 


Art  and  the  Church,  557. 

Articles,  fundamental  and  non- 
fundamental,  315. 

Assvrian  discoveries  and  the  Bible, 
5S,  130  ff.,  134  ff. 

Astronomv  and  the  Bible,  86  ff. 

Atheism,  25;  State  A.,  428. 

Augustine,  St.,  on  faith,  40;  Mosaic 
davs,  80;  miracles,  169;  his  di- 
lem.ma,  222. 

Authority  of  God,  42;  Bible,  52;  the 
Church,  393  ff.,  412;  the  apostles, 
318;  the  Pope,  373  ff. ;  the  State, 
413, 421 ;  A.  of  Pentateuch,  56  ff. ; 
gospels,  141  ff. ;  evidence  by  A., 
47 

Authenticity,  56. 

A  nto  da  fe,  485. 

Avignon,  Popes  at,  342. 

Axioms,  evidence  of,  48. 

Baalbak,  ruins,  85, 

Babel,  tower  of,  137. 

Babylon,  136. 

Baer,  Dr.  von,  on  unity  of  man- 
kind, 112. 

Balmes  on  civilizing  influence  of 
Church,  570. 

Baltimore  councils,  573:  on  slav- 
ery, 538. 

Baptism  of  desire,  468,  471 ;  blood, 
471;  water,  472. 

Barbarians  converted,  543  ff. 

Bartholomew,  massacre  of  St.,  496 
ff. ;  Church  not  responsible,  497. 

Beast  and  man,  102  ff. 

Bergier  on  miracles,  170;  Christian 
education,  560. 

Berthelot  on  science,  68. 

Bible,  books,  52;  canon,  355,  358; 
historic  authority,  52,  55,  301; 
inspiration,    54 ;     interpretation, 


576 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX. 


65,  70,  346;  chronology,  86,  98, 
118  f.;  phraseology,  70,  79,  87; 
variant  readings,  60,  119,  147, 
153;  genealogies,  119;  manu- 
scripts, 60,  146;  B.,  Church,  and 
the  rule  of  faith,  355  ff. ;  B.  and 
modern  science,  63  ff.,  70  f. ; 
geology,  72  ff,,  120;  astronomy, 
88  ff.;  biology,  93  ff.;  paleon- 
tology, 97, 120. 

Biology,  93  ff. 

Bishops  successors  of  apostles,  307, 
317,  320,  327;  difference,  331. 
See  Episcopate. 

Bollandists,  211,  337. 

Books,  CathoUc,  6;  bad,  6,  396. 

Bossuet's  "Variations  of  Protes- 
tantism," 346. 

Boulanger  on  the  deluge,  82. 

Bourdaloue  on  faith,  40. 

Broglie,  de,  on  the  gospels,  151; 
Buddhism,  276. 

Brownson,  O.,  on  Roman  primacy, 
387,  n. ;  bad  popes,  519  n. 

Bruno,  Giordano,  496  n. 

Buddha,  268. 

Buddhism  and  Christianity,  265  ff. ; 
its  history,  268;  dogma,  271; 
moraUty,  274 ;  practical  B.,  276  ff. 

Csesarism,  pagan,  533 ;  in  liberal- 
ism, 430. 

Calvin,  344,  348  f. ;  intolerant,  461. 

Camisards,  war,  506. 

Canonical  mission,  329. 

Canonization,  336  f . 

Catechism,  the,  561. 

''Cathohc,"  name,  338. 

Catholic  and  Protestant  nations, 
546  ff. 

Catholicism,  liberal,  430  ff. 

Catholics  and  modem  govern- 
ments, 423,  424  n. ;  civil  liberty, 
424  n.,  455  f.;  modem  liberties, 
448 

CathoHcity,  324,  326;  of  the  Church, 
324,  338;  not  in  Protestantism, 
324 ;  nor  in  Greek  schism,  369. 

Cauchy  on  great  men  in  Chris- 
tianity, 297. 

Causette  on  man  and  ape,  109. 

Centralization,  political,  456. 

Certainty,  46 ;  evidence,  46 ;  kinds, 
48,  176;  C.  of  faith,  31,  33,  46, 
50,  246  n. ;  and  infallibiHty,  400; 
C.  of  miracles,  176  f. 

Chalcedon,  Council,  on  primacy, 
388. 


Chaldea,  129;  discoveries,  130, 
134  ff. 

Charitv,  Christian,  216,  536  ff.g 
Buddhist,  275;  perfect,  472. 

Charlemagne,  336,  563. 

Children,  unbaptized,  470;  pagan, 
532;  Christian,  542. 

China,  128. 

Christianity,  its  divinity,  160  ff., 
293  f . ;  establishment  and  propa- 
gation, 217;  conservation,  226; 
fruits  and  results,  236  ff.,  521  ff. ; 
doctrine,  243  ff.,  535  ff.;  supe- 
riority, 265,  296  ff. ;  necessity, 
obligation,  294;  Ch.  and  false 
religions,  259  ff. ;  Buddhism, 
265  ff. ;  Ch.  and  the  Church,  305; 
and  genius,  296,  553. 

Chronology,  biblical,  86,  98;  un- 
certain, 118  f. 

Chronometers,  geological,  121. 

Church,  the  Catholic,  299  ff. ; 
prophecies,  203;  definition,  301; 
a  society,  303;  visible,  306;  its 
origin,  303  ff. ;  necessity,  obliga- 
tion, 305,  466  ff. ;  mission,  end, 
306,  412,  418,  421,  550;  consti- 
tution, 307 ;  perfect  society,  308, 
416  f.;  true  Church,  3i0  ff.; 
notes,  311  ff. ;  other  attributes, 
313;  members,  good  and  bad, 
323,  468,  517;  defections,  392; 
legislation,  335  n. ;  unity,  313, 
331;  sanctity,  321,  335;  cath- 
olicity, 324,  338;  apostolicity, 
327,  339;  other  prerogatives, 
391  ff.;  perpetuity,  391,  572; 
indefectibiUty,  391  ff.  ;  au- 
thority, 393;  infallibility,  399; 
independence,  411  ff. ;  coercive 
power,  398,  417,  476;  body  and 
soul,  469;  her  rights,  416,  477; 
temporal  propertv,  417;  Ch.  and 
Bible,  355  ff. ;  Ch.  and  State,  396, 
398,410  ff.,  446;  distinct, 41 5, 422; 
Church  superior,  412,  417;  con- 
flict, 417  ff.;  union,  420  ff.,  441; 
Ch.  and  liberahsm,  424  ff. ;  spirit 
of  times,  433  f. ;  modem  hber- 
ties,  443  ff. ;  civil  liberty,  424  n., 
455';  Ch.  and  civihzation,  521, 
543;  science,  41,  493,  550;  let- 
ters and  education,  550;  cul- 
ture, 550  ff.;  genius,  296,  553; 
art,  557;  persecutions,  215,  221, 
227,  460  f.;  tolerance,  441,  444, 
458  ff. ;  abuses,  457;  she  pro- 
motes temporal  happiness,  422, 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX. 


577 


549  ff.;    Ch.  and    slavery,    53G; 

charges  against  Ch.,  432,  457  ff. 
Churches,  heretical  and    schismat- 

ical,  300.     See  Sects. 
Circumstances  alter  cases,  443. 
Civilization,  true,  521,  524;  pagan, 

236,  242,  523  ff.;  Christian,  535; 

Catholic  and  Protestant,  546. 
Civiltd  Cattolica  on  toleration,  444. 
Claudius  on  loss  of  cosmic  energy, 

96. 
Coercive  power,  398,  417,  476;    of 

State,  440. 
Colleges  and  the  Church,  569. 
Color  of  human  races,  114. 
Communication    of    attributes    in 

Christ,  292. 
Concordats,  416,  418. 
Confession.     See  Penance. 
Conflict  between  faith  and  reason, 

38,  42,  63;  science  and  Bible,  63, 

69;  Church  and  State,  417. 
Congregations.     See  Roman  C. 
Conscience,  liberty  of,  436,  500 
Consciousness,  46. 
Constance  council,  334,  408  n. 
Constantinople  patriarchate,  361. 
Contrition,  perfect,  470,  472  n. 
Conversion  of  St.    Paul,     109;    of 

heathens,  338;  barbarians,  543. 
Copernicus,  89,  488,  493. 
Cosmogony,  73. 
Councils,  ecumenical,  403,  404 ;  and 

Greek  Church,  367 ;  and  primacy, 

387;  C.  and  education,  562. 
Counsels,  evangelical,  252. 
Cranium,  human,  115. 
Creation  of  universe,  72,  93 ;   light, 

91;  life,  92;  man,  101. 
Credibihty,  41,  48. 
Criterion  of  certainty,  46  ff. 
Crusades,  503. 
Culture  and  the  Church,  550. 

Darras  on  the  Bible  and  Oriental 
discoveries,  139  f. 

Darwdnism,  103  ff. 

Dates,  biblical,  118  f.;  155.  See 
Chronology. 

Days  of  creation,  79,  91. 

Decalogue,  27,  29,  549. 

Dechamps,  Card.,  on  exclusive  sal- 
vation, 467  f. 

Declaration  of  Galilean  clergy,  407. 

Definition  ex  Cathedra,  409,  489. 

Deltas  and  alluvia,  123. 

Deluge,  Mosaic,  80. 

Denmark,  persecutions,  462, 


Deposition  of  kings  by  Pope,  508  ff. 
Descendants  of  Adam,  110;  Noe, 

86. 
Determinism,  451  f. 
Development  of  faith,  332. 
Devil,  miracles,  178. 
Discipline    of    Church   changeable, 

333,   392;   by   proper  authority, 

434. 
Discoveries,  Oriental  and  Bible,  58, 

130. 
Divinitv  of  Christ,  285  ff. ;    Church, 

299  ff. 
Doctors  of  the  Church,  341  n. 
Dogma,  immutable,   332,   339;    no 

new  dogmas,  339. 
Dogmatic  facts,  403. 
Dominick,  St.,  not  Inquisitor,  475. 

Earth,  origin,  90;  rotation,  89, 
488  ff. ;  why  man's  dwelling,  87; 
how  peopled,  116. 

Ebers  on  Egypt  and  Bible,  134. 

Edict  of  Nantes  revoked,  499. 

Education,  rights  of  Church,  396; 
liberty  of  E.,  436 ;  neutral  or  non- 
sectarian,  396,  427 ;  State  monop- 
oly, 430;  need  of  religious  K, 
557;  Church  and  E.,  550;  popu- 
lar, 558;  parish  schools,  562; 
higher  E.,  567. 

Egyptian  discoveries,  58,  130 ;  his- 
tory, 125. 

Emperors  and  Popes  in  Middle 
Ages,  509,  512. 

End  (purpose)  of  man,  28,  522; 
universe,  251;  Church,  306,  418, 
550;  State,  421,  429. 

England.     See  Anglican. 

Ephesus,  council,  on  primacy,  388. 

Episcopate,  institution,  304,  318  ff. ; 
its  powers,  329,  393;  apostolic 
succession,  327,  330.  See  Bish- 
ops. 

Errors  of  paganism,  32;  in  Bible, 
154  n. ;   E.  has  no  right,  479. 

Esther,  book  of,  and  Persia,  138. 

Euler  on  prayer,  168  n. ;  unbelief, 
296. 

Evangelical  counsels,  252.^ 

Evidence,  46,  48;  of  faith,  46. 

Evil,  origin,  249. 

Evolution,  95  ff. 

Ex  Cathedra,  409,  489. 

Exequatur,  416. 

Experience,  evidence  of,  46. 

Faith,    certainty,  31,  33,  46,  400; 


578 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX. 


and  reason,  38  ff. ;  supernatural 
grace,  42,  49,  51 ;  and  prayer,  42, 
247  n. ;  motives  and  preambles, 
41,  247  n. ;  evidence,  46;  sources, 
49;  free  act,  49  f.,  246;  difficul- 
ties, 45,  50  f. ;  "  Good  faith  "  and 
invincible  ignorance,  467,  471; 
apostasy  punishable,  476;  right 
of  preservation,  477. 

Family,  pagan,  531 ;  Christian,  541. 

Fatahsm,  166  n.,  451  f. 

Fathers  of  the  Church,  341  n. ; 
apostolic,  143  n. ;  F.  on  gospels, 
143;  unity  of  Church,  315;  min- 
istry, 320;  St.  Peter,  380. 

Faye  on  stars  not  inhabited,  89  n. 

Fiefs,  papal,  508  f. 

Filioque,  363. 

Flavius,  Joseph,  on  Pentateuch,  60. 

Flints,  120,  122  f. 

Florence,  council,  363,  368;  on 
primacy,  389. 

Fossils,  97  ff. ;  human,  121  ff. 

Frayssinous'  ''Defense  of  Christi- 
anity," 8. 

Freemasonry  and  liberalism,  430; 
great  enemy  of  Church,  571. 

Free-will,  450 ;  existence,  451 ;  F. 
and  faith,  50,  245  f. ;  denied  by 
Luther,  349. 

Freppel,  bishop,  on  science,  67; 
unbelief,  296. 

Fundamentals  and  non-fundamen- 
tals, 315. 

Galileo,  trial,  488  ff. ;  and  infalli- 
bility, 489 ;  G.  not  martyred,  493 ; 
nor  tortured,  495;  E  pur  si 
muove,  496. 

Gallicanism,  407. 

Gaume  on  pagan  society,  238. 

Genealogies,  biblical,  119. 

Generation,  spontaneous,  93  ff. ; 
reproductive,  112. 

Geology  and  Bible,  72. 

Germs,  organic,  94  n. 

Gibbon  refuted,  223  ff. 

Gladiators,  528,  539. 

God's  relations  with  man,  25,  451  n., 
453  f.;  knowable,  30,  47;  au- 
thority, 42;  truthfulness,  49; 
providence,  165  n. ;  wisdom,  168, 
294 ;  love  and  mercy,  245  f . ; 
glory,  251 ;  rest,  77  n 

Gospels,  53;  authenticity,  141;  in- 
tegrity, 146;  veracity,  148; 
apocryphal,  156;  myths,  156  f. 

Government  of  Church,  307,  394, 


397  ff. ;  civil  G.,  421,  429;  divine 
and  human  G.,  440.  See  Ministry, 
State. 

Grace,  primitive,  28,  248;  sanctify- 
ing, 250;  means,  254;  Gr  of 
faith,  42,  49,  51. 

Greek  schism,  360;  no  unity,  366; 
no  sanctity,  368;  not  Catholic, 
369;  nor  apostolic,  370;  return, 
371 ;  Gr.  and  Russian,  369. 

Grounds  of  faith.     See  Motives. 

Guizot  on  papacy  in  Middle  Ages, 
512  n. ;  on  Church  and  education, 
552. 

Hair  of  human  races,  115. 

Happiness,  natural  and  supernatu- 
ral, 28,  420;  temporal  H.  pro- 
moted by     Church,  422,  549. 

Harlez,  de,  on  Buddhism,  277. 

Henry  VIII.  of  England,  344,  348. 

Heresy,  310,  314,  395;  a  crime,  476, 
478. 

Hergenroether,  Card.,  on  Middle 
Ages,  509. 

Hexahemeron,  76  ff.,  98. 

Hierarchy,  Catholic,  307. 

Hieroglyphics,  135. 

Hir,  le,  on  biblical  chronology,  118; 
ancient  nations,  126;  Bible  and 
tradition,  340  n. 

History  of  religion,  259. 

Holland,  persecutions,  464. 

Holy  Office,  431,  474. 

Hugo,  Victor,  on  religious  educa- 
tion, 559. 

Huguenots  intolerant,  462;  sedi- 
tious, 501 ;  St.  Bartholomew,  496 ; 
edict  of  Nantes,  499. 

Huxley  on  man  and  ape,  103. 

Hypnotism,  180  f. 

Ignorance,  invincible,  467,  469,  471. 
Immaculate  Conception,  B.  V.  M., 

408. 
Immorality  and  unbelief,  296. 
Immutability  of  God,  167;  nature, 

165;    Church,  228,  392;  dogma, 

332  n.,  432  f. 
Incarnation,  why  on  this  earth,  87. 
Indef edibility  of  Church,  391. 
Independence  of  Church,   411;    of 

State,  415;  of  Pope,  514;  society 

dependent  from  God,  426;    also 

man,  451,  453,  479. 
India,  history,  128. 
Infallibility    of    apostles,    331;     of 

Church,  391,  399;  necessity,  400; 


ALPHABETICAL   INDEX. 


579 


given  by  Christ,  401 ;  object,  403 ; 
seat,  404;  Papal  I.,  404;  its  con- 
ditions, 409;  not  impeccability, 
404;  nor  inspiration,  403;  Galli- 
canism,  407;  Galileo,  489;  Ro- 
man congregations  not  infallible, 
492. 

Infidelity.     See  Unbelief. 

Inhabited  stars,  89. 

Inquisition,  473  ff. ;  ecclesiastical 
474;  lawful,  476;  abuses,  48U 
clemency,  481,  484;  effects,  48(3 
Spanish  I.,  475;  security,  482 
abuses,  484;  number  of  victims, 
485;  Protestant  I.,  485. 

Inspiration  of  bible,  54. 

Instinct,  107,  451. 

Institution,  canonical,  329. 

Integrity  of  biblical  books,  56; 
Pentateuch,  60;  gospels,  146. 

Interpretation,  biblical,  345;  pri- 
vate, 346;  of  dogma,  431. 

Intolerance,  Catholic,  458,  465; 
Protestant,  460;  infidel,  464  f. 
See  Tolerance. 

Ireland,  Archbp.,  on  papal  inde- 
pendence, 517  n. 

Islamism,  spread,  225. 

Jacolliot  refuted,  256  n. 

Jerusalem,  destruction,  213;  re- 
building, 214. 

Jesus  Christ,  divine  mission,   160; 
its  proofs,  183;  His  miracles,  174, 
183;    their    purpose,    186;     His 
Resurrection,  187 ;  prophecies  ful- 
filled   in    Him,    206;     His    owti 
prophecies,   212,   223;    His  doc- 
trine, 243,  264;    His  manner  of 
teaching,     257;      holiness,     278 
character,  287 ;  no  impostor,  283 
His  divinity,  285 ;  proofs,  286  n. 
God-man,      291;       Mary,      His 
mother,  292;   His  social  royalty, 
421;   imitation  and  love  of  Ch., 
282. 

Jews,  dispersion,  215;  in  Spain, 
475. 

Joan,  Popess,  518. 

Jonas  and  the  fish,  66  n. 

Joseph  in  Egypt,  131. 

Josue  and  the  sun,  65. 

Jouffroy  on  catechism,  561. 

Judgment,  private,  346. 

Julian,  apostate,  214. 

Jurisdiction  and  order,  329,  394, 
398. 

Justification,  Protestant,  346  f. 


Kennicot,  Hebrew  variants,  60 
Keppler  on  Pentateuch,  66. 

Laboring  classes,  pagan,  531; 
Christian,  540. 

Lacordaire,  "Conferences,"  8;  on 
Messianic  prophecies,  206 ; 
Christ's  goodness,  279  f. 

Lake  dwellings,  125. 

Languages,  lUb;  confusion  of,  117. 

Laplace's  cosmogony,  73. 

Lapparent  on  age  of  man,  121. 

Laws  of  nature,  156  ff . ;  of  history, 
217  n.;  moral  L.,  217. 

Lazarus  resuscitated,  184. 

Legislation  of  the  Church,  335  n. ; 
her  power,  398. 

Leibnitz  on  salvation,  472  n. ;  on 
papal  arbitration,  513. 

Lenormant  on  Egyptian  history, 
126. 

Leo  XIII.  on  infidel  and  Catholic 
literature,  6;  faith  and  reason, 
41 ;  science,  67 ;  return  of  Greek 
schismatics,  372;  Church  and 
State,  410  ff.;  concordats,  418; 
papal  sovereignty,  414,  514;  du- 
ties of  civil  power,  422  f.,  428  f.; 
tolerance,  442;  liberalism,  425  ff., 
428;  liberal  Catholicism,  431  n. ; 
liberty,  449,  454  ff. ;  temporal 
benefits  by  the  Church,  521; 
higher  education,  556. 

Liberalism,  424  ff.;  radical,  425; 
effects,  426,  429;  social  (mod- 
erate), 426;  effects,  430;  politi- 
cal L.,  424  n. ;  economic,  425  n. ; 
Cathohc,  430;  L.  and  socialism, 
429,  439;  modem  liberties,  435; 
freemasonry,  430. 

Liberties,  modem,  435  fT. ;  of  con- 
science and  worship,  436,  500; 
press,  education,  association, 
436;  false,  437;  injurious,  438; 
when  tolerated,  442  fT. 

Liberty,  449  ff. ;    not  license,  450; 
physical,  440,  450,  453;    moral, 
440,  452;  political  and  civil,  455; 
and  the  Church,  424  n.,  456;  L. 
of  faith,  49,  246. 
Libraries,  Assyrian,  135. 
Life,  origin,  95,  97    ff. ;     disappear- 
ance, 96. 
Light,  creation  of,  91. 
Literature,  its  effect  for  good  and 
evil,  6;  bad  L.,  6,  396;  L.  and  the 
Church,  553. 
Liturgy.     See  Worship. 


580 


ALPHABETICAL   INDEX. 


Llorente,  482  n.,  484. 

Louis  XIV.  and  Gallicanism,  407. 

Love  of  God  and  faith,  245  n. ;   of 

Christ,  282  f . 
I^uther,   343,  348;    on  good  works 

and  sin,  350 ;  intolerant,  460. 
Lyell,  on  man's  age,  121. 

Magic  and  miracles,  178. 

Magisterium,  of  the  Church,  394; 
twofold,  395;  infallible,  400. 

Man,  his  end,  28,  240  f.,  420  f.,  522; 
origin,  99;  and  beast,  102,  451, 
454;  primeval  m.,  118  n. ;  his 
reason,  106;  speech,  106;  re- 
ligious sense,  107;  perfectibility, 
107;  supernatural  gifts,  248;  re- 
demption, 247,  250;  liberty,  449; 
dependence,  451  n.,  453,  479. 

Manetho,  historian,  126. 

Mankind,  age,  99;  unity,  110;  dis- 
persion, 116. 

Manuscripts  of  Pentateuch,  60; 
gospels,  146. 

Marks  of  the  Church,  311  ff. 

Martyrs,  Christian,  229  ff.;  their 
testimony,  231,  233;  number, 
229,  232;  no  fanatics,  235  f . ; 
"M.  of  science,"  493,  496. 

Mary,  Mother  of  God,  292;  Immac- 
ulate Conception,  408. 

Massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew,  496  ff. 

Materialism,  101  n. 

Medispvalism,  432. 

Men;^el,  on  Protestant  intolerance, 
460. 

Messias,  the,  36;  prophecies,  200; 
types,  203;  expectation,  205. 

Metempsychosis,  Buddhist,  273. 

Method,  proper,  of  science,  38  f. ; 
of  Christian  apology,  161  f.;  of 
Catholic  apology,  8,  56,  300,  341. 

Michael  Cerularius,  361. 

Middle  Ages,  laws,  441;  penalties, 
482;  public  law,  478  f.,  508,  511 
f.;  power  of  popes,  507;  civil- 
ization, 554 ;  schools,  562  ff. 

Might  not  right,  453  ff. 

Milton  and  St.  Peter,  376  n. 

Minimizing,  431,  433. 

Ministry,  eccl.,  its  institution,  304, 
307,  310  ff. ;  unity,  317,  333;  per- 
petuity, 327  f.,  330;  powers,  329, 
394,  397;  Protestant  M.,  348, 
353 

Miracles,  161,  163  ff.;  possible,  165; 
and  natural  law,  170;  knowable, 
171;    probative  value,   181;    M, 


of  Christ,  174,  183  ff.;  apostles 
208;  Church,  323;  saints,  21 1' 
336;  modern,  211,  337;  moral! 
217  f.;  M.  of  the  devil,  178;  pa- 
gan, 179. 

Mission,  canonical,  329. 

Mohammedanism,  225,  504  f. 

Monarchy,  Church  a,  307. 

Monks  and  civilization,  554  f. 

Monogenists,  110. 

Monopoly  of  education,  430. 

Morality,  Christian,  252  f.;  Bud- 
dhist, 274;  Protestant,  351;  in- 
dependent, lay,  425,  428;  pagan, 
237,  257,  521  ff. ;  in  Catholic  and 
Protestant  countries,  546  ff. 

Moses,  35;  author  of  Pentateuch, 
57,  61;  Mosaic  religion;  35  f. ; 
abrogated,  36. 

Motives  of  faith,  41,  46,  49,  246  n. 

Moulart,  Canon,  on  Middle  Ages, 
509. 

Mueller,  Max,  on  diversity  of 
languages,  117. 

Mysteries  of  faith,  42  ff. ;  of  na- 
ture 43  45 

Myths,'  bibUcal,  156  f. ;  302. 

Nantes,  edict  of,  499. 

Napoleon  I.  on  papal  sovereignty, 

516. 
Nature,  its  mysteries,  43,  45 ;  laws, 

166  n.,  167;  their  harmony,  174. 
Netherlands,  persecutions,  464. 
Newman,  Card.,  on  notes  of  Church, 

312  n. 
Niceea,  Council,  on  pnmacy,  387 
Nihilists,  429. 
Ninive.     See  Assyria. 
Nirvana,  Buddhist,  273. 
Noe's  Ark,  84  f. 
Notes  of  the  Church,  311  ff. 
Number  of  martyrs,  232;    victims 

of  Inquisition,  485;    Huguenots 

killed,  498. 

Objections  against  Pentateuch,  86; 
gospels,  152;  miracles,  173;  Res- 
urrection of  Christ,  197;  testi- 
mony of  martyrs,  233;  spread 
of  Christianitv,  223;  divinity  of 
Christ,  259;  His  teaching,  259; 
unity  of  the  Church,  334;  her 
power,  398;  primacy  of  St.  Peter, 
377;  papal  principahty,  515. 

Oldenberg  on  Buddhism,  275. 

OUivier,  Pere.  on  Mosaic  days,  80; 


ALPHABETICAL   INDEX. 


581 


why  this  planet  was  chosen  for 

Christ,  87 ;  on  primacy,  390. 
Order  and  jurisdiction,  329  f. 
Orders,  Anglican,  353. 
Ordination,  329. 
Origin  of  universe,  72;    earth  and 

stars,  90;   light,  91;   vegetation, 

92;  life,  95;  man,  99. 
Original  sin,  249,  470  n. 
"Orthodox"  church,  365. 
"Outside  the  Church  no  salvation," 

466. 

Pagan  philosophy,  32;  religion, 
256;  society,  237  f.,  523  ff.; 
P.  nations  converted,  218  ff.,  526. 

Paleontology,  97. 

Papacy  in  Middle  Ages,  508  ff. ;  sal- 
utary influence,  512;  temporal 
power,  514;  P.  and  civilization, 
555.     See  Pope. 

Papal  States,  514. 

Pasteur  on  spontaneous  generation, 
94. 

"Patriarch  universal,"  361. 

Patriarchal  religion,  34;  gradually 
corrupted,  35. 

Patriarchates,  eastern,  362  n.,  366. 

Paul,  St.,  conversion,  209. 

Peat-moors,  124. 

Penance,  sacrament,  254,  470. 

Pentateuch,  52;  authority,  56; 
style,  59;  integrity,  60;  verac- 
ity, 61 ;  P.  and  modem  sciences, 
63 ;  P.  not  a  scientific  book,  65  f . 

Pentecost,  miracle,  209. 

Perfectibility  of  man,  107. 

Perfection,  Christian,  252. 

Perpetuity  of  Church,  228. 

Persecutions  foretold,  215;  pagan, 
211  f.,  233;  Protestant,  460; 
Huguenot,  498. 

Peter,  St.,  primacy,  304,  307,  373 
ff, ;  at  Rome,  383;  his  succes- 
sors, 327,  381. 

Peter  I.  of  Russia,  365. 

Pf  aff  on  Hexahemeron,  79 ;  deluge, 
84. 

Photius,  361. 

Pithom,  city,  133. 

Pie,  Card.,  on  miracle,   162;    cm- 

Pius  IX.,  Svllabus,  419;  on  Church 

and  State,  419,  447. 
Placet,  royal,  416. 
Planetary  system,  origin,  89. 
Plurality    of     inhabited       worlds, 

90. 


Politics  without  religion,  427. 

Polygamy,  pagan,  532. 

Polygenists,  110. 

Polytheism,  256;  origin,  260  f. 

"Poor  Scholars,"  563. 

Poor,  the,  before  Christ,  530;  after 
Ch.,  539. 

Pope,  primacy,  373  ff. ;  not  only  of 
honor,  but  of  jurisdiction  or  au- 
thority, 373,  382;  successor  of 
St.  Peter,  381,  387;  infallibility, 
404;  temporal  power  in  Middle 
Ages,  508;  its  nature,  510;  inter- 
national arbitrator,  513;  tem- 
poral sovereignty,  514;  Popes 
and  Inquisition,  474;  science, 
443;  civilization,  555;  anti- 
popes,  334;  P.  during  schisms, 
342;   P.  and  bishops,  307,  382. 

Popess  Joan,  518. 

Positivism,  25. 

Poverty,  pagan,  530;  Christian, 
539 

Powers  of  Church,  329,  416;  pope, 
373,  382;  State,  415. 

Prayer  and  faith,  42,  247  n.;  and 
laws  of  nature,  165  f.,  168; 
means  of  grace,  254;  the  Lord's 
P.,  246  n.,  277. 

Primacy,  Roman,  373  ff.  See  Pa- 
pacy, Pope.     P.  of  honor,  373. 

Private  judgment,  346. 

Propagation  of  Christianity,  217, 
338,  573;  Islamism  and  Protes- 
tantism, 225;   Buddhism,  276. 

Property,  temporal,  of  Church,  417. 

Prophecy,  161  f.,  182  ff. ;  Messianic 
56  n.,  200  ff. ;  concerning  Church, 
208;  by  Christ,  212,  223. 

Prophets,  books  of,  153. 

Prosperity,  temporal,  in  paganism, 
523 ;  in  Catholic  and  Protestant 
countries,  546. 

Protestantism,  spread,  225;  found- 
ers, 343;  no  ministry,  317;  no 
unity,  345;  no  sanctity,  348; 
not  catholic,  324,  352;  nor 
apostolic,  352 ;  false  Church,  343 ; 
its  fmits,  351;  intolerant,  460; 
formulas,  347,  466  n. ;  Pr.  and 
the  Greeks,  365  n.,  366  n. ;  an 
exclusive  salvation,  466  n. 

Providence,  divine,  165. 

Purcell,  Archbp.,  on  bad  popes, 
518  n.,  519  n. 

Purgatory  and  the  Greeks,  370  n. 

Quatrefages  on  man,  108. 


582 


ALPHABETICAL   INDEX. 


Races,  human,  111;  resemblances, 
113;  differences,  114. 

Radical  liberals,  425 ;  consistent, 
429, 

Rationalism,  38;  effects,  51,  425; 
Social  R.,  427. 

Rationalists  on  Pentateuch,  59  n., 
miracles,  161;  Providence,  165; 
Church,  302. 

Readings,  variant,  in  Bible,  147, 
153. 

Reason,  47 ;  and  religion,  31 ;  faith, 
38 ;  mysteries,  42 ;  in  man,  106. 

Reformers,  Protestant,  343,  348; 
had  no  divine  mission,  353;  in- 
tolerant, 460  ff. 

Religion,  natural,  25;  supernat- 
ural, 26;  positive,  27;  revealed, 
29;  historic  phases,  34;  patri- 
archal, 34;  Mosaic,  35;  Chris- 
tian, 36;  its  defence,  6,  8;  study 
of  Cath.  R.,  7;  its  divinity,  37, 
39;  mysteries,  42;  analogy  be- 
tween true  and  false  R.,  259  ff. ; 
R.  and  education,  396,  427 ;  poli- 
tics, 427;  State,  420,  425,  439. 

Rehgious  sense,  107,  260. 

Renan  refuted,  158;  on  deluge,  83; 
Peter  at  Rome,  386. 

Reproduction  of  species,  112. 

Resurrection  of  Lazarus,  184;  of 
Christ,  187  f. 

Revelation,  divine,  29;  possibility, 
30,  44;  necessity,  30;  history, 
34 ;  proofs,  46,  161 ;  sources,  52 ; 
and  science,  30,  39,  43,  67. 

Right,  436  f. ;  not  the  same  as 
might,  440,  452  ff. ;  error  and 
evil  have  no  rights,  437,  447,  479. 

Rites,  Oriental,  360;  Congregation 
of  R.  and  miracles,  336. 

Roman  Congregations  not  infalli- 
ble, 492. 

Rome,  see  of  Peter,  383  ff. 

Rossi,  J.  B.,  Hebrew  variants,  60. 

Rousseau  on  miracles,  165;  Christ, 
279,  281;  Protestant  tolerance, 
459;  education,  559  n.;  intol- 
erant, 464. 

Rule  of  faith,  355  ff. 

Russia  Christianized,  364;  schism, 
364  f.;  holy  synod,  365;  rela- 
tion to  Greek  schism,  369;  re- 
turn to  Rome,  371. 

Ruskin  (and  Milton)  on  St.  Peter, 
376  n. 

Sabbath,  29,  34,  65,  77  n. 


Sacraments,  254,  335,  397. 

Saint-Hilaire  on  Buddhism,  267  f. 
Saints  in  the  Church,  336  f. 

Salvation  exclusively  in  the  Church, 
305,  466  ff. ;  invincible  igno- 
rance, 467,  469;  negative  unbe- 
lief, 470  n. ;  S.  of  Jews,  pagans, 
471  f. ;  of  Gentiles  before  Christ, 
471. 

Samaritans,  57. 

Sanctity  of  Christ,  278  ff. ;  Church, 
313,  321  ff.,  457;  not  in  Protes- 
tantism, 348 ;  nor  schism,  368. 

Sardica,  Council,  on  primacy,  388. 

Sargon,  fasts  of,  137. 

Schism,  310,  314;  Western,  334; 
ancient,  342;  Anglican,  344; 
Greek,  360 ;  Russian,  364. 

Science  and  revelation,  30,  39,  43; 
its  proper  method,  38;  contra- 
dictions, 71 ;  Sc.  and  Pentateuch, 
63 ;  Christianity,  67  ff. ;  miracles, 
166;  modem  Sc,  64  n. 

Scientists  on  spontaneous  genera- 
tion, 93;  Mosaic  creation,  69; 
deluge,  82;  Noe's  ark,  85;  unity 
of  mankind.  111 ;  age  of  man,  121. 

Schools.     See  Education. 

Scriptures.     See  Bible. 

Sects,  ancient,  300,  360;  Protes- 
tant, 324,  343,  345,  352. 

Serfs  in  Middle  Ages,  537  n. 

Separation  of  Church  and  State,  427, 
430,  446. 

Sense,  internal,  46;  external,  47; 
moral  and  religious,  107  ff.,  260. 

Septuagint  version,  56,  61. 

Sin,  origin,  249  f . ;  in  Protestant 
doctrine,  349  f. 

Sinners  in  the  Church,  323,  517. 

Slavery,  pagan,  526;  mitigated 
and  abolished,  536;  Jewish, 
537  n. 

Slave-trade,  538. 

Society,  definition,  302;  perfect, 
308;  S.  and  religion,  426,  428, 
439;  S.  pagan,  533;  Christian, 
542.     See  State. 

Sovereignty,  temporal,  of  Pope, 
514. 

Species  and  races.  111,  114. 

Speech,  106. 

Spiritualism,  180. 

Stars  inhabited,  90 ;  origin,  90  f. 

State,  its  purpose,  421  ff.,  429; 
independence,  415;  inferiority, 
417  f. ;  S.  and  Church,  396,  410, 
446;  duties  toward  Church,  420 


ALPHABETICAL   INDEX, 


583 


ff. ;     union    with    Church,    419; 

separation  from  Church,  427, 430, 

446. 
Straus  refuted,  156  f. 
Succession,     apostolic,     327,     330; 

mode,  330.     See  Apostolicity. 
Sufferings,  249,  251. 
Sweden,  intolerance,  463. 
Syllabus  of  Pius  IX.,  419. 

Templars,  Knights,  481. 

Testimony,  evidence  of,  44,  47,  49; 
divine,  43;  pagan  T.  for  Penta- 
teuch, 58. 

Theocracy,  414. 

Thesis  and  hypothesis,  443. 

Thiers  on  papal  sovereignty,  576. 

Thierry,  A.,  on   monks  of    Middle 

Tolerance,  442  ff.;  allowed,  443; 
conditions,  447;  civil  and  dog- 
matic, 446,  448,  458.  See  In- 
tolerance. 

Torture  in  Inquisition,  483;  Gali- 
leo trial,  494. 

Tradition,  340;  primitive,  35,  260; 
Christian,  52;  Jewish,  57,  63; 
apostolic  and  divine,  340;  T.  on 
deluge,  82;  gospels,  142;  Peter's 
Roman  sojourn,  384;  papal  in- 
fallibility, 402. 

Transformism,  99  ff. 

Trinity,  Bl,  45. 

Truthfuhiess  of  Bible,  56;  Penta- 
teuch, 61 ;  gospels,  148. 

Ultramontanism,  432. 
Unbaptized  children,  470. 
Unbelief,  causes,  295  f. ;    negative 

and  positive,  470  n. 
Union  of  Church  and  State,  419  ff., 

441. 
Unity  of  human  race,  110;   of  the 

Church,  313,  331  ff.,  401;   no  U. 

in   Protestantism,    345;    nor   in 

schism,  366. 
Universality.     See  Catholicity. 
Universe,    origin,    72;     formation, 

73;    age,  75;  destruction,  96  n. ; 

destiny,  251. 


Universities  and  the  Church,  567  ff. 

Valsecchi,  "Foundations  of  Reli- 
gion," 8. 

Variants,  biblical,  147,  153. 

Variations  in  gospels,  153;  in  Prot- 
estant beUef,  346. 

Varieties  in  the  species.  111  f. 

Vassals,  papal,  and  fiefs,  508  f. 

Vatican  Council  on  necessity  of 
revelation,  33;  faith  and  reason, 
38;  miracles  and  prophecy,  163; 
primacy,  389 ;  papal  infallibility, 
405;  dogma,  433;  science,  552. 

Veracity.     See  Truthfulness. 

Vegetation,  origin,  92. 

Vigouroux  on  deluge,  84;  Egypt, 
127;  India  and  China,  129. 

Vincent  of  Lerins,  357. 

Virchow,  Dr.,  on  creation,  93,  95; 
man  and  monkey,  103;  man's 
age,  123. 

Waldensians,  474. 

Wandering  of  nations,  543. 

Wars,  Peasants'  W.  in  Germany, 
460;  Thirty  Years'  W.,  461;  re- 
ligious, in  France,  506;  Hugue- 
nots, 501. 

Wish  to  beUeve,  50,  246  n. 

Will.     See  Freewill. 

Wine  in  Egypt,  132. 

Wiseman,  Card.,  on  gospels,  146. 

Witchcraft,  486  n. 

Woman,  pagan,     531;     Christian, 
541. 

Working  classes,  pagan,  531;  Chris- 
tian, 540. 

Works,  good,  rejected  by  reform- 
ers, 349. 

World.     See  Universe. 

Worship,  Christian,  255;  Catholic, 
335;  changeable,  334;  Protes- 
tant, 346;  Oriental,  360 ;  inde- 
pendent of  civil  rule,  417;  lib- 
erty of  W.,  436,  443  n.,  446, 
500. 


Zwinghus,  344, 348;  intolerant,  462. 


PRINTED    BY    BENZIGER    BROTHERS.    NEW    YORK. 


Standard    Catholic    Books 

PUBLISHED    BY 

BENZIGER    BROTHERS, 

CINCINNATI:  NEW  YORK:  Chicago: 

343  Main  St.  36  and  38  Barclay  St.  211-213  Madison  St. 


DOCTRINE,   INSTRUCTION,   DEVOTION. 

ABANDONMENT;  or,  Absolute  Surrender  of  Self  to  Divine  Providence.     Rev. 

J.  P.  Caussade,  S.J.  net,  o  40 
ADORATION  OF  THE  BLESSED  SACRAMENT.    Tesniere.     Cloth,  net,  i   25 

APOSTLES'    CREED,   THE.     Rev.   Muller,   C.SS.R.  net,  1    10 

ART  OF   PROFITING  BY  OUR   FAULTS.     Rev.  J.   Tissot.  net,  o  40 

BIBLE  HISTORY.  o  50 
BIBLE     HISTORY.     PRACTICAL     EXPLANATION    AND     APPLICATION 

OF.     Rev.  J.  J.  Nash.  net,  i   50 

BIBLE,  THE  HOLY.  o  80 

BLESSED   VIRGIN,   THE.     Rev.    Dr.   Keller.  o  75 
BOOK  OF  THE  PROFESSED. 

Vol.  I.  net,  o   75 

Vol.  II.  net,  o  60 

Vol.  III.  net,  o  60 

BOYS'  AND  GIRLS'  MISSION  BOOK.     By  the  Redemptorist  Fathers.  o  40 

CATECHISM  EXPLAINED,  THE.     Spirago-Clarke.  net,  2  50 

CATHOLIC   BELIEF.     Faa  di  Bruno 

Paper,  o   25;   100  copies,  15  00 

Cloth,   o   50;   25  copies,  7   50 

CATHOLIC  CEREMONIES  and  Explanation  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Year.     Abbe 

DURAND. 

Paper,  o  30;   25  copies,  4  50 

Cloth,  o   60;    25   copies,  9  00 

CATHOLIC    PRACTICE    AT     CHURCH    AND    AT    HOME.     Rev.  Alex.  L. 
A.  Klauder. 

Paper,  o  30;    25  copies,  4  50 

Cloth,  o   60;    25  copies,  9   00 

CATHOLIC   TEACHING    FOR    CHILDREN.     Winifride  Wray.  o  40 
CATHOLIC   WORSHIP.     Rev.  R.  Brennan,  LL  D. 

Paper,  o   15;    100  copies,  10  00 

Cloth,  o   25;   100  copies,  17  00 

CHARACTERISTICS    OF   TRUE    DEVOTION.     Rev.  N.  Grou,  S.J.  net,  o  75 

CHARITY  THE  ORIGIN  OF  EVERY  BLESSING.  o  60 

CHILD   OF  MARY.     Prayer-book  for  Children.  o  60 

CHILD'S   PRAYER-BOOK   OF   THE   SACRED   HEART.  o   20 

CHRISTIAN  DOCTRINE,  SPIRAGO'S  METHOD  OF.  net,  1  50 
CHRISTIAN    FATHER.     Right  Rev.  W.  Cramer. 

Paper,  o  25;   25  copies,  3  75 

Cloth,  o  40;  25  copies,  6  00 

I 


6  oo 

net. 

I     lO 

LL.             net. 

o   75 

o    50 

Per  loo,  net, 

3    50 

Per  loo,  net. 

3    50 

0    40 

CHRISTIAN   MOTHER,     Right  Rev.  W.  Cramer. 

Paper,  o   25;   25  copies, 

Cloth,  o  40;   25  copies, 
CHURCH   AND   HER   ENEMIES.     Rev.  M.  Muller,  C.SS.R. 
COMEDY  OF  ENGLISH  PROTESTANTISM.     A.  F.  Marshall. 
COMPLETE   OFFICE   OF   HOLY  WEEK. 
CONFESSION. 
CONFIRMATION. 
CROWN   OF  THORNS,  THE. 

DEVOTION    OF   THE    HOLY   ROSARY  and  the  Five  Scapulars.  net,  o  75 

DEVOTIONS    AND    PRAYERS    FOR    THE    SICK-ROOM.      Krebs,    C.SS.R. 

Cloth,  net,  i    00 

DEVOTIONS  FOR  FIRST  FRIDAY.     Huguet.  o  40 

DEVOUT    INSTRUCTIONS,  GOFFINE'S.     i  00;  25  copies,  17  50 

DIGNITY  AND   DUTIES   OF  THE   PRIEST;  or,  Selva.  a  Collection  of  Mate- 
rial for  Ecclesiastical  Retreats.     By  St.  Alphonsus  de  Liguori.        net,  i    25 
DIGNITY,     AUTHORITY,     DUTIES     OF      PARENTS,     ECCLESIASTICAL 

AND    CIVIL    POWERS.     By   Rev.    M.    Muller,    C.SS.R.  net,  i   40 

DIVINE  OFFICE:  Explanations  of  the  Psalms  and  Canticles.    By  St.  'Alphonsus 

DE  Liguori.  net,  i   25 

EPISTLES   AND   GOSPELS.  o  25 

EUCHARIST    AND     PENANCE.     Rev.    M.    Muller,    C.SS.R.  net,  i   10 

EUCHARISTIC    CHRIST,   Reflections  and  Considerations  on  the   Blessed  Sac- 
rament.    Rev.    A.    Tesniere.  net,  i   00 
EUCHARISTIC    GEMS.     A  Thought   About   the   Most   Blessed   Sacrament  for 

Every  Day  in  the  Year.     By  Rev.  L.  C  Coelenbier.  o  75 

EXPLANATION    OF   COMMANDMENTS,    ILLUSTRATED.  i  00 

EXPLANATION    OF    THE    APOSTLES'    CREED.    ILLUSTRATED.         i  00 
EXPLANATION    OF    THE     BALTIMORE     CATECHISM    OF    CHRISTIAN 

DOCTRINE.     Rev.  Th.  L.  Kinkead.  net,  i   00 

EXPLANATION    OF   THE   COMMANDMENTS,  Precepts  of  the  Church.     Rev. 

M.  Muller,   C.SS.R.  net,  1   10 

EXPLANATION    OF    THE    GOSPELS  and  of  Catholic  Worship.     Rev.  L.  A. 

Lambert. 

Paper,  o   30,   25  copies,  4   5° 

Cloth,  o   60;   25  copies,  9  00 

EXPLANATION    OF    THE    HOLY    SACRAMENTS,    ILLUSTRATED.       i  00 
EXPLANATION  OF  THE    HOLY    SACRIFICE    OF    THE    MASS.     Rev.  M. 

v.  Cochem.  I    25 

EXPLANATION     OF     THE     OUR     FATHER     AND     THE     HAIL     MARY. 

Rev.  R.  Brennan,  LL.D.  o  75 

EXPLANATION     OF     THE     PRAYERS     AND     CEREMONIES     OF     THE 

MASS,    ILLUSTRATED.     Rev.   D.  I.  Lanslots,  O.S.B.  i    25 

EXPLANATION    OF    THE    SALVE    REGINA.     Liguori.  o  75 

EXTREME    UNCTION.  o  10 

100  copies,  6  00 

FIRST    AND    GREATEST    COMMANDMENT.     By  Rev.  M.  Muller,  C.SS.R. 

net,  I   40 

FIRST    COMMUNICANT'S    MANUAL.  o  50 

100  copies,  25   00 

FLOWERS     OF     THE     PASSION.     Thoughts   of   St.    Paul  of  the  Cross.      By 

Rev.  Louis  Th.  de  Jesus-Agonisant.  o  50 

FOLLOWING    OF    CHRIST.     Thomas  .\  Kempis. 

With  Reflections,  o  50 

Without  Reflections,  o  45 

Edition  de  luxe,  i   25 

FOUR   LAST   THINGS,   THE:    Death,   Judgment.  Heaven,  Hell.     Meditations. 

Father  M.  v.  Cochem.     Cloth,  o  75 

GARLAND    OF    PRAYER.     With  Nuptial  Mass.     Leather.  o  90 

2 


GENERAL    CONFESSION     MADE     EASY.     Rev.   A.    Konings.   C.SS.R. 

Flexible,     o  15;   1 00  copies,  10  00 

GENERAL   PRINCIPLES   OF   THE    RELIGIOUS    LIFE.     Verheykn.  O.S.B. 

net,  o  30 
GLORIES   OF   DIVINE   GRACE.     Dr.  M.  J.  Scheeben.  net,  i   50 

GLORIES   OF    MARY.     St.  Alphonsus  de  Liguori.     2  vols.,  net,  2  50 

Popular  ed.     i  vol.,  i   25 

GOD  THE  TEACHER  OF  MANKIND.     Muller.     9  vols.         Per  set.  nef.  9    50 
GOFFINE'S     DEVOUT     INSTRUCTIONS.     140  Ilhistrations.     Cloth,         i   00 

25  copies,  17   so 

GOLDEN     SANDS.     Little   Counsels   for   the   Sanctification   and   Happiness   of 

Daily  Life. 

Third  Series,  o   50 

Fourth  Series,  o  50 

Fifth  Series,  o   50 

GRACE   AND   THE   SACRAMENTS.     By  Rev.  M.  Muller,  C.SS.R.    net,  1   25 
GREAT    MEANS    OF   SALVATION  AND   OP    PERFECTION.     St.  Alphon- 
sus DE  Liguori.  net,  i    25 
GREAT    SUPPER    OF    GOD,    THE.     A  Treatise  on  Weeklv  Communion.     By 

Rev.    S.  CouBE,  S.J.     Edited    by   Rev.    F.  X.  Brady,    S.J.     Cloth, 

net,  I  00 
GREETINGS   TO  THE   CHRIST-CHILD,  a  Collection  of  Poems  for  the  Young. 

Illustrated.  o  60 

GUIDE    TO    CONFESSION    AND    COMMUNION.  o  60 

HANDBOOK    OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  RELIGION.    By  Rev.  W.  Wilmers,  S.  J. 

net,  I  so 
HARMONY  OF  THE  RELIGIOUS  LIFE.  Rev.  H.  J.  Heuser.  net,  i  2s 
HEART    OF    ST.    JANE    FRANCES    DE    CHANTAL.     Thoughts  and  Prayers 

Compiled  by  the  Sisters  of  the  Divine  Compassion.  net,  o  40 

HIDDEN      TREASURE:     The   Value   and   Excellence   of   the   Holy  Mass.     By 

St.  Leonard  of  Pt.  Maurice.  o  50 

HISTORY   OF   THE   MASS.     By  Rev.  J.  O'Brien.  net,  i   2s 

HOLINESS   OF   THE   CHURCH    IN   XIX.   CENTURY.     Scheeben.  o  10 

HOLY     EUCHARIST.     By    St.    Alphonsus    de    Liguori.     The    Sacrifice,    the 

Sacrament,  and  the  Sacred  Heart  of  Jesus  Christ.    Novena  to  the  Holy  Ghost. 

net,  I  25 
HOLY  MASS.     By  Rev.  M.  Muller,  C.SS.R.  net,  i   25 

HOLY  MASS.     By  St.  Alphonsus  de  Liguori.  net.  i   25 

HOW    TO    COMFORT    THE    SICK.      Rev.  Jos.  A.   Krebs,   C.SS.R.      Cloth, 

net,  I   00 

HOW  TO   MAKE    THE     MISSION.     By   a   Dominican   Father.     Paper,   o  10; 

per  100,  5  00 

ILLUSTRATED    PRAYER-BOOK    FOR    CHILDREN.  o  25 

IMITATION   OF   CHRIST.     See    'Following  of  Christ." 
IMITATION    OF    THE    BLESSED    VIRGIN    MARY.     Translated  by  Mrs.  A. 

R.  Bennett -Gladstone. 

Plain  Edition,  o  50 

Edition  de  luxe,  i    5° 

IMITATION   OF  THE   SACRED   HEART.     By  Rev.  F.  Arnoudt,  S.J.       i   2s 
INCARNATION,    BIRTH,    AND    INFANCY    OF    JESUS    CHRIST;    or,  the 

Mysteries  of  Faith.     By  St  Alphonsus  de  Liguori.  net,  i    25 

INDULGENCES,  A  PRACTICAL    GUIDE   TO.     Rev.  P.  M.  Bernad,  O.M.I. 

o    75 
IN    HEAVEN   WE    KNOW    OUR    OWN.     By  Pere  Blot,  S.  J.  o  60 

INSTRUCTIONS     AND      PRAYERS     FOR     THE     CATHOLIC     FATHER. 

Right  Rev.  Dr.  A.  Egger.  o  60 

INSTRUCTIONS     AND     PRAYERS     FOR     THE     CATHOLIC     MOTHER. 

Right  Rev.  Dr.  A.  Egger.  o  60 

INSTRUCTIONS  AND    PRAYERS   FOR   CATHOLIC    YOUTH.  o  60 


o 

25 

net,  o 

6o 

o 

35 

o 

25 

o 

25 

o 

25 

o 

25 

35.  : 

2 

per 

50 

I 

00 

INSTRUCTIONS  FOR  FIRST    COMMUNICANTS.     By  Rev.   Dr.  J.  Schmitt. 

net,  o  50 

INSTRUCTIONS  ON  THE  COMMANDMENTS  OF  GOD  and  the  Sacra- 
ments of  the  Chxirch.     By  St.  Alphonsus  de  Liguori. 

Paper,  o  25;  25  copies,  3   75 

Cloth,  o  40;   25  copies,  6  00 

INTERIOR    OF    JESUS    AND    MARY.     Grou.     2  vols..  net,  2  00 

INTRODUCTION     TO     A     DEVOUT     LIFE.     By    St.    Francis    de    Sales. 
Cloth,  o  50 

LETTERS  OF   ST.   ALPHONSUS   DE   LIGUORI.     4  vols.,  each  vol..  net,  i   25 

LETTERS  OF  ST.  ALPHONSUS  LIGUORI  and  General  Alphabetical  Index 
to  St.  Alphonsus'   Works.  net,  125 

LITTLE   ALTAR    BOY'S    MANUAL. 

LITTLE    BOOK    OF    SUPERIORS. 

LITTLE    CHILD    OF    MARY.     A  Small  Prayer-book. 

LITTLE    MANUAL    OF    ST.    ANTHONY.     Lasanch. 

LITTLE  MANUAL  OF  ST.  JOSEPH.     Lings. 

LITTLE    MONTH    OF    MAY.     By  Ella  McMahon.     Flexible, 

LITTLE   MONTH    OF   THE    SOULS    IN    PURGATORY. 

LITTLE     OFFICE     OF     THE     IMMACULATE     CONCEPTION. 
100, 

LITTLE  PICTORIAL    LIVES   OF   THE   SAINTS.     New  cheap  edition. 

LITTLE  PRAYER-BOOK  OF  THE  SACRED  HEART.  By  Blessed  Mar- 
garet Mary  Alacoque.  o  40 

LIVES  OF  THE  SAINTS.  With  reflections  for  every  day  of  the  year. 
Large  size.  i   50 

LIVING    CHURCH    OF    THE    LIVING   GOD.     Coppens.     o.io,  per  100.   6  00 

MANUAL  OF  THE  BLESSED  VIRGIN.  Complete  Manual  of  Devotion  of 
the  Mother  of  God.  o  60 

MANUAL  OF  THE  HOLY  EUCHARIST.  Conferences  on  the  Blessed  Sac- 
rament and  Eucharistic  Devotions.     By  Rev.  F.  X.  Lasance. 

MANUAL   OF    THE   HOLY   FAMILY. 

MANUAL    OF    THE    HOLY    NAME. 

MANUAL    OF    THE    SACRED    HEART,    NEW. 

MANUAL    OF   THE    SODALITY    OF    THE    BLESSED    VIRGIN. 

MANUAL    OF    ST.    ANTHONY,    NEW. 

MANUAL    OF    ST.    ANTHONY,    LITTLE.     Lasance. 

MANUAL    OF    ST.   JOSEPH,    LITTLE.     Lings. 

MARI^.  COROLLA.  Poems  by  Father  Edmund  of  the  Heart  of  Mary,  C.P. 
Cloth,  I    25 

MASS  DEVOTIONS  AND  READINGS  ON  THE  MASS.  By  Rev.  F.  X. 
Lasance.  o  75 

MAY    DEVOTIONS,    NEW.     Rev.  Augustine  Wirth,  O.S.B.  net,  i  00 

MEANS    OF    GRACE.     By  Rev.  Richard  Brennan,  LL.D.  2  50 

MEDITATIONS  FOR  ALL  THE  DAYS  OF  THE  YEAR.  By  Rev.  M. 
Hamon,  S.S.     5  vols.,  net,  5  00 

MEDITATIONS   FOR   EVERY   DAY   IN   THE   YEAR.     Baxter.       net.  i   25 

MEDITATIONS  FOR  EVERY  DAY  IN  THE  YEAR.  Rev.  B.  Ver- 
CRUYSSE,  S.J.      2  vols.,  net,  2  75 

MEDITATIONS   FOR   RETREATS.     St.  Francis  de  Sales.     Cloth,     net,  o  75 

MEDITATIONS    ON    THE    FOUR    LAST    THINGS.     Father  M.  v.  Cochem. 

o  75 

MEDITATIONS  ON  THE  LAST  WORDS  FROM  THE  CROSS.  Father 
Charles  Perraud.  net,  o  50 

MEDITATIONS  ON  THE  LIFE.  THE  TEACHINGS,  AND  THE  PAS- 
SION  OF  JESUS   CHRIST.     Ilg-Clarke.     2  vols.,  net,  3  50 

MEDITATIONS   ON   THE    MONTH    OF   OUR    LADY.  o  75 

4 


0 

75 

0 

60 

0 

50 

0 

50 

0 

50 

0 

60 

0 

25 

0 

25 

MEDITATIONS    ON    THE    PASSION    OF    OUR    LORD.  o  40 

MEDITATIONS  ON  THE  SUFFERINGS  OF  JESUS  CHRIST.  By  Rev. 
Francis  da  Perinaldo.  net,  o  75 

METHOD  OP  CHRISTIAN  DOCTRINE,  SPIRAGO'S.  Edited  by  Right 
Rev.  S.  G.  Messmer.  net,  i   50 

MISCELLANY.  Historical  sketch  of  the  Congregation  of  the  Most  Holy  Re- 
deemer. Rtiles  and  Constitutions  of  the  Congregation  of  the  Most  Holy 
Redeemer.  Instructions  on  the  Religious  State.  By  St.  Alphonsus  de 
LiGUORi.  net,  i    25 

MISSION  BOOK  FOR  THE  MARRIED.    Very  Rev.  F.  Girardey,  C.SS.R.  o  50 
MISSION  BOOK  FOR  THE  SINGLE.     Very  Rev.  F.  Girardey.  C.SS.R.     o  50 
MISSION     BOOK     OF     THE     REDEMPTORIST     FATHERS.     A    Manual    of 
Instructions    and    Pravers   to    Preserve   the   Fruits   of   the    Mission.     Drawn 
chiefly  from  the  works  of  St.  Alphonsus  Liguori.  o  50 

MISTRESS    OF     NOVICES.     THE,   Instructed   in    Her   Duties.     Leguay. 

net,  o  7<i 
MOMENTS    BEFORE    THE    TABERNACLE.     Rev.  Matthew    Russell.  S.J. 

net,  o   40 

MONTH,    NEW,    OF   THE    HOLY   ANGELS.     Si.  Francis  df.  Sales.        o  25 

100  copies,  19  00 

MONTH,    NEW,    OF    THE    SACRED    HEART.     St.  Francis  de  Sales,    o  25 

MONTH    OF    MAY;    a  Series  of  Meditations  on  the  Mysteries  of  the  Life  of  the 

Blesse  d  Virgin.     By  F.  Debussi,  S.J.  o  50 

MONTH    OF    THE    DEAD;    or,  Prompt  and  Easy  Deliverance  of  the  Souls  in 

Purgatory.     By  Abbe  Cloquet.  o  50 

MONTH    OF    THE    SOULS    IN    PURGATORY.     The  Little  "Golden  Sands." 

o   25 
MOST    HOLY    SACRAMENT.     Rev.  Dr.  Jos.  Keller.  o  75 

MY    FIRST  COMMUNION,  the  Happiest  Day  of  My  Life.     Brennan.  o  75 

MY    LITTLE    PRAYER-BOOK.     Illustrated.  o   12 

NEW  MAY   DEVOTIONS.     Wirth.  net,  i   00 

NEW   MONTH    OF   THE    HOLY   ANGELS.  o   25 

NEW  MONTH   OF   THE   SACRED   HEART.  o  25 

NEW    SUNDAY-SCHOOL    COMPANION.  o  25 

NEW    TESTAMENT.      Cheap  Edition. 

32mo,  flexible  cloth,  net,  o   i^ 

32mo,  lambskin,  limp,  round  comers,  gilt  edges,  net,  o  75 

NEW    TESTAMENT.      Illustrated  Edition. 

i6mo,  printed  in  two  colors,  with  100  full-page  illustrations,  net,  o  60 

i6mo,  Rutland  Roan,  limp,  solid  gold  edges,  net,  i    25 

NEW    TESTAMENT.     India  Paper  Edition. 

Lambskin,   limp,  round  comers,  gilt  edges,  net,  1   00 

Persian  Ca  If,  limp,  round  comers,  gilt  edges,  net,  1    25 

Morocco,  limp,  roimd  comers,  gold  edges,  gold  roll  inside,  net,  i    50 

NEW   TESTAMENT.     Large  Print  Edition. 

i2mo,  large,  new  type,  net,  o   75 

i2mo,  French  Levant,  limp,  gold  edges,  net,  i    25 

NEW    TESTAMENT     STUDIES.     By   Right    Rev.   Mgr.    Thomas   J.    Conaty, 

D.D.      i2mo,  o  60 

OFFICE,  COMPLETE,   OP  HOLY  WEEK.  o  50 

ON    THE    ROAD    TO    ROME.     By  W.  Richards.  net,o  50 

OUR  LADY  OF  GOOD  COUNSEL  IN  GENAZZANO.     Mgr.  Geo.  F.  Dillon, 

D.D.  o  75 

OUR    FAVORITE    DEVOTIONS.     By  Very  Rev.  Dean  A.  A.  Lings.  o  75 

OUR    FAVORITE    NOVENAS.     Very  Rev.  Dean  A.  A.  Lings.  o   75 

OUR   MONTHLY    DEVOTIONS.     By  Very  Rev.  Dean  A.  A.  Lings.  i   25 

OUR  OWN  WILL   AND  HOW  TO  DETECT   IT   IN   OUR   ACTIONS.     Rev. 

John  Allen,  D.D.  net,  o  75 

PARACLETE,  THE.     Devotions  to  the  Holy  Ghost.  o  6c 

5 


PARADISE  ON  EARTH  OPENED  TO  ALL;  A  Religious  Vocation  the  Surest 
Way  in  Life.     By  Rev.  Antonio  Natale,  S.J.  net,  o  40 

PASSION  AND  DEATH  OF  JESUS  CHRIST.     By  St.  Alphonsus  de  Liguori. 

net,   I    25 

PASSION  FLOWERS.  Poems  by  Father  Edmund  of  the  Heart  of  Marv 
C.P.  I   is 

PEARLS  FROM  FABER.     Brunowe.  o  50 

PEOPLE'S  MISSION  BOOK,  THE.     Paper,  o.io;  per  100,  6  00 

PEPPER  AND  SALT,  SPIRITUAL.     Stang. 

Paper,  0.30;  25  copies,  4  50 

Cloth,   0.60;   25  copies,  9  00 

PERFECT  RELIGIOUS,  THE.     De  La  Motte.     Cloth,  net,  i  00 

PICTORIAL  LIVES  OF  THE  SAINTS.  New  edition,  with  Reflections  for 
Every  Day  in  the  Year.  2   ko 

PIOUS  PREPARATION  FOR  FIRST  HOLY  COMMUNION.  Rev.  F.  X. 
Lasance.     Cloth,  o  75 

POPULAR  INSTRUCTIONS  ON  MARRIAGE.  Very  Rev.  F.  Girasdey,  C.SS.R 
Paper,  0.25;  25  copies,  3   75 

Cloth,-  0.40;  25  copies,  6  00 

POPULAR  INSTRUCTIONS  ON  PRAYER.  By  Very  Rev.  Ferreol  Girardey. 
C.SS.R.     Paper,  0.25,  25  copies,  3  75 

Cloth,  0.40;  25  copies,  6  00 

POPULAR  INSTRUCTIONS  TO  PARENTS  on  the  Bringing  up  of  Children. 
By  Very  Rev.  F.  Girardey,  C.SS.R.     Paper,  0.25;  25  copies,  3  75 

Cloth,  0.40;  25  copies,  6  00 

PREACHING.  Vol.  XV.  St.  Alphonsus  de  Liguori.  The  Exercises  of  the 
Missions.  Various  Counsels.  Instructions  on  the  Commandments  and 
Sacraments.  net,  i    25 

PREPARATION  FOR  DEATH.  St.  Alphonsus  de  Liguori.  Considerations 
on  the  Eternal  Truths.     Maxims  of  Eternity.     Rule  of  Life.  net,  i   25 

PRODIGAL  SON;  or,  the  Sinner's  Return  to  God.  ttet,  i   00 

REASONABLENESS  OF  CATHOLIC  CEREMONIES  AND  PRACTICES. 
Rev.  J.  J.  Burke.  o  35 

RELIGIOUS  STATE,  THE.  With  a  Treatise  on  the  Vocation  to  the  Priesthood. 
By  St.  Alphonsus  de  Liguori.  o  50 

REVELATIONS  OF  THE  SACRED  HEART  to  Blessed  Margaret  Mary.  Bou- 
gaud.     Cloth,  net,  i   50 

ROSARY,  THE   CROWN   OF  MARY.     By  a  Dominican  Father.  o   10 

Per  100,  5  00 

ROSARY,  THE  MOST  HOLY.     Meditations.     Cramer.  o  50 

SACRAMENTALS  OF  THE  HOLY  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  Rev.  A.  A. 
Lambing,  D.D.     Paper,  0.30;  25  copies,  4  50 

Cloth,  0.60;  25  copies,  9  00 

SACRAMENTALS— Prayer,  etc.     By  Rev.  M.  Muller,  C.SS.R.  net,  i   00 

SACRED  HEART,  THE.     Rev.  Dr.  Joseph  Keller.  o  75 

SACRIFICE  OF  THE  MASS  WORTHILY  CELEBRATED,  THE.  By  Rev. 
Father  Chaignon,  S.J.  net,   i   50 

SECRET  OF  SANCTITY.     St.  Francis  de  Sales.  net,  i  00 

SERAPHIC  GUIDE,  THE.  A  Manual  for  the  Members  of  the  Third  Order  of 
St.  Francis.     By  a  Franciscan  Father.  o  60 

SHORT  CONFERENCES  ON  THE  LITTLE  OFFICE  OF  THE  IMMACU- 
LATE CONCEPTION.     Very  Rev.  J.  Rainer.  o  50 

SHORT  STORIES  ON  CHRISTIAN  DOCTRINE.  From  the  French  by  Mary 
McMahon.  net,  o   75 

SHORT  VISITS  TO  THE  BLESSED  SACRAMENT.     Lasance.  o  25 

SPIRAGO'S  METHOD  OF  CHRISTIAN  DOCTRINE.  Edited  by  Rt.  Rev.  S. 
G.  Messmer.  net,   i   50 

SPIRITUAL  CRUMBS  FOR  HUNGRV  LITTLE  SOULS.  Mary  E.  Richard- 
son, o  50 

SPIRITUAL  DIRECTION.  net,  o  6c 

6 


SPIRITUAL    EXERCISES    FOR    A  TEN    DAYS'    RETREAT.     Very  Rev.  v. 
Smetana,  C.SS.R.  net,  i  oo 

SPIRITUAL   PEPPER  AND   SALT.     Stang. 

Paper,  0.30;   25  copies,  4  5° 

Cloth,   0.60;   25  copies,  9  00 

SODALISTS'  VADE  MECUM.  o  50 

SONGS  AND  SONNETS      By  Maurice  Francis  Egan.  i  00 

SOUVENIR   OF   THE    NOVITIATE.     By  Rev.  Edward  I.  Taylor,      net,  o  60 
ST.  ANTHONY,  LITTLE  MANUAL  OF.  o  60 

ST.  ANTHONY.     Rev.  Dr.  Jos.  Keller.  o  75 

STATIONS   OF   THE    CROSS.     Illustrated.  o  50 

STORIES  FOR  FIRvST  COMMUNICANTS.     Rev.  J.  A.  Keller,  D.D.  o  50 

STRIVING  AFTER  PERFECTION.     Rev.  Joseph  Bayma,  S.J.  net,  i  00 

SURE  WAY  TO  A  HAPPY  MARRIAGE.     Rev.  Edward  I.  Taylor. 

Paper,  0.25;  25  copies,  3   75 

Cloth,   0.40;  25  copies.  6  00 

THOUGHTS  AND  COUNSELS  for  the  Consideration  of  Catholic  Young  Men. 

Rev.  P.  A.  Doss,  S.J.  net,   i    25 

THOUGHTS  FOR  ALL  TIMES.     Mgr.  Vaughan.  o  90 

TRAVELLER'S   DAILY  COMPANION.  o  05 

Per  100,  3  50 

TRUE  POLITENESS.     Abbe  Francis  Demore.  net,  o  60 

TRUE  SPOUSE  OF  JESUS  CHRIST.     By  St.  Alphonsus  de  Liguori.     2  vols. 

net,   2   50 
The  same,  one  volume  edition,  net,   i  00 

TWO  SPIRITUAL  RETREATS  FOR  SISTERS.    By  Rev.  E.  Zollner.  net,  i   00 
VENERATION  OF  THE  BLESSED  VIRGIN.     Her  Feasts,  Prayers,  ReUgious 
Orders,  and  Sodalities.     By  Rev.  B.  Rohner,  O.S.B.  i    25 

VEST-POCKET  GEMS  OF  DEVOTION.  o  20 

VICTORIES  OF  THE  MARTYRS;  or,  the  Lives  of  the  Most  Celebrated  Martyrs 
of  the  Church.     Vol.  IX.     By  Alphonsus  de  Liguori.  net,   1    25 

VISITS  TO  JESUS  IN  THE  TABERNACLE.     Hours  and  Half  Hours  of  Adora- 
tion before  the  Blessed  Sacrament.     With  a  No  vena  to  the  Holy  Ghost  and 
Devotions  for  Mass,  Holy  Communion,  etc.    Rev.  F.  X.  Lasance,     Cloth,    i    25 
VISITS  TO  THE  BLESSED  SACRAMENT.     Lasance.  o  25 

VISITS  TO  THE  MOST  HOLY  SACRAMENT  and  to  the  Blessed  Virgin  Mary. 
By  St.  Alphonsus  de  Liguori.  o  50 

VOCATIONS  EXPLAINED.  Matrimony,  Virginity,  The  Religious  State,  and  the 
Priesthood.     By  a  Vincentian  Father,      o.io;  100  copies,  6  00 

WAY  OF  INTERIOR  PEACE.     By  Rev.  Father  De  Lehen,  S.J.  net,   i    25 

WAY  OF  SALVATION  AND  PERFECTION.     Meditations,  Pious  Reflections, 
Spiritual  Treatises.     St.  Alphonsus  de  Liguori.  net,  i   25 

WAY  OF  THE  CROSS.     Paper,  0.05,  100  copies,  2  50 

JUVENILES. 

ADVENTURES  OF  A  CASKET. 

ADVENTURES  OF  A  FRENCH  CAPTAIN. 

AN    ADVENTURE   WITH   THE    APACHES.     By  Gabriel  Ferry. 

ANTHONY.     A  Tale  of  the  Time  of  Charles  II.  of  England. 

ARMORER  OF  SOLINGEN.     By  William  Herchenbach. 

AS  TRUE  AS  GOLD.     Mannjx. 

BENZIGER'S  JUVENILE  SERIES.     No.  i.     Each  Vol., 

BENZIGER'S  JUVENILE  SERIES.     No.  2.     Each  Vol., 

BERKLEYS,  THE.     Wight. 

BERTHA,  or.  Consequences  of  a  Fault. 

7 


0 

45 

0 

45 

0 

40 

0 

45 

0 

40 

0 

45 

0 

40 

0 

45 

0 

45 

0 

4S 

BEST  FOOT  FORWARD.     By  Father  Finn.  o  85 

BETTER  PART.  o  45 

BISTOURI.     By  A.  Melandri.  o  40 

BLACK  LADY  AND  ROBIN  RED  BREAST.     By  Canon  Schmid.  o  25 

BLANCHE  DE  MARSILLY.  o  45 

BLISSYLVANIA  POST-OFFICE.     By  Marion  Ames  Taggart.  o  40 

BOB  O'LINK.     Waggaman.  o  45 

BOYS  IN  THE  BLOCK.     By  Maurice  F.  Egan.  o  25 

BRIC-A-BRAC  DEALER.  o  45 

BUNT  AND  BILL.     Clara  Mulholland.  o  45 

BUZZER'S    CHRISTMAS.     By  Mary  T.  Waggaman.  o  25 

BY  BRANSCOME  RIVER.     By  Marion  Ames  Taggart.  o  45 

CAKE  AND  THE  EASTER  EGGS.     By  Canon  Schmid.  o  25 

CANARY  BIRD.     By  Canon  Schmid.  o  40 

CAPTAIN  ROUGEMONT.  o  45 

CASSILDA;  or  the  Moorish  Princess.  o  45 
CAVE  BY  THE  BEECH  FORK,  THE.     By  Rev.  H.  S.  Spalding,  S.J.     Cloth, 

o  8s 
CLAUDELIGHTFOOT;  or.  How  the  Problem  was  Solved.  By  Father  Finn,  o  85 
COLLEGE  BOY,  A.  By  Anthony  Yorke.  Cloth,  o  85 
CONVERSATION  ON  HOME  EDUCATION.  o  45 
DIMPLING'S  SUCCESS.  By  Clara  Mulholland.  o  40 
EPISODES  OF  THE  PARIS  COMMUNE.  An  Account  of  the  Religious  Persecu- 
tion, o  45 
ETHELRED  PRESTON,  or  the  Adventures  ot  a  Newcomer.     By  Father  Finn. 

o  85 

EVERY-DAY  GIRL,  AN.     By  Mary  C.  Crowley.  o  45 

FATAL  DIAMONDS.     By  E.  C.  Donnelly.  o  25 
FINN,  REV.  F.  J..  S.J.: 

HIS  FIRST  AND  LAST  APPEARANCE.     Illustrated.       .  i  00 

THE  BEST  FOOT  FORWARD.  o  85 

THAT  FOOTBALL  GAME.  o  85 

ETHELRED  PRFSTON.  o  8s 

CLAUDE  LIGHTFOOT.  o  8s 

HARRY  DEE.  o  8s 

TOM  PLAYFAIR.  o  85 

PERCY  WYNN.  o  8s 

MOSTLY  BOYS.  o  8s 

FISHERMAN'S  DAUGHTER.  o  4s 

FIVE  O'CLOCK  STORIES;    or.  The  Old  Tales  Told  Again.  o  7s 

FLOWER  OF  THE  FLOCK,  THE,  and  the  Badgers  of  Belmont.     By  Maurice 

F.  Egan.  o  8s 

FRED'S  LITTLE  DAUGHTER.     By  Sara  Trainer  Smith.  o  40 

GERTRUDE'S  EXPERIENCE.  o  45 

GODFREY  THE  HERMIT.     By  Canon  Schmid.  o  2s 

GOLDEN  LILY,  THE.     Hinkson.                                                                '  o  4s 

GREAT-GRANDMOTHER'S  SECRET.  o  4s 

HARRY  DEE;    or,  Working  it  Out.     By  Father  Finn.  o  8s 

HEIR  OF  DREAMS,  AN.     By  Sallie  Margaret  O'Mallet.  o  4s 

HER  FATHER'S  RIGHT  HAND.  o  45 

HIS  FIRST  AND  LAST  APPEARANCE.     By  Father  Finn.  i  oc 

HOP  BLOSSOMS.     By  Canon  vSchmid.  o  25 

HOSTAGE  OF  WAR,  A.     By  Mary  G.  Bonesteel.  o  40 

HOW  THEY  WORKED  THEIR  WAY.     By  Maurice  F.  Egan.  o  75 

INUNDATION,  THE.     Canon  Schmid.  o  40 

JACK  HILDRETH  AMONG  THE  INDIANS.     2  vols.,  each,  o  8s 

8 


JACK    HILDRETH    ON    THE    NILE.     By    Marion    Amks    Taggart.     Cloth, 

o  8s 

JACK  O" LANTERN.     By  Mary  T.  Waggaman.  040 

JUVENILE  ROUND  TABLE.  i  00 

KLONDIKE  PICNIC.     By  Eleanor  C.  Donnelly.  o  8s 

LAMP  OP  THE  SANCTUARY.     By  Cardinal  Wiseman.  o  25 

LEGENDS  OF  THE  HOLY  C?IILD  JESUS  from  Many  Lands.  By  A.  Fowler 

LuTZ.  o  75 

LITTLE  MISSY.     By  Mary  T.  Waggaman.  o  4s 

LOYAL  BLUE  AND  ROYAL  SCARLET.     By  Marion  A.  Taggart.  o  85 

MADCAP  SET  AT  ST.  ANNE'S.     By  Marion  J.  Brunowe.  o  45 

MARCELLE.     A  True    Story.                                                      •  o  45 ' 

MARY  TRACY'S  FORTUNE.     Sadlier.  o  45 

MASTER  FRIDOLIN.     By  Emmy  Giehrl.  o  2.^ 

MILLY  AVELING.      By  Sara  Trainer  Smith.     Cloth,  o  8s 

MOSTLY   BOYS.      By  Father  Finn.  o  85 

MYSTERIOUS    DOORWAY.     By  Anna  T.  Sadlier.  o  4s 

MY  STRANGE    FRIEND.     By  Father  Finn.  025 

NAN  NOBODY.      By  Mary  T.  Waggaman.  040 

OLD  CHARLMONT'S   SEED-BED.     By  Sara  Trainer  Smith  o  45 

OLD  ROBBER'S  CASTLE.     By  Canon  Schmid.  o  25 

OLIVE  AND  THE  LITTLE  CAKES.  o  45 

OUR  BOYS  AND  GIRLS'  LIBRARY.     14  vols.,  each  o  25 

OUR  YOUNG  FOLKS'   LIBRARY.     10  vols.,  each  o  45 

OVERSEER  OF  MAHLBOURG.     By  Canon  Schmid.  o  25 

PANCHO  AND  PANCHITA.     By  Mary  E.  Mannix.  o  40 

PAULINE  ARCHER.     By  Anna  T.  Sadlier.  o  40 

PERCY  WYNN;    or,  Making  a  Boy  of  Him.     By  Father  Finn.  085 

PICKLE  AND  PEPPER.     By  Ella  Loraine  Dorsey.  o  85 

PRIEvST  OF  AUVRIGNY.  o  45 

QUEEN'S   PAGE.     By  Katharine  Tynan  Hinkson.  o  45 

RECRUIT  TOMMY  COLLINS      Bonesteel.  o  45 

RICHARD,    or,  Devotion  to  the  Stuarts.  o  4s 

ROSE  BUSH.     By  Canon  Schmid.  o  25 

SEA-GULLS'   ROCK.     By  J.  Sandeau.  o  40 

SUMMER  AT  WOODVILLE.  By  Anna  T.  Sadlier.  o  45 
TALES  AND  LEGENDS  OF  THE  MIDDLE  AGES.     F.  De  Capella.         o  7s 

TALES  AND  LEGENDS  SERIES.     3  vols.,  each.  o  75 

TAMING  OF  POLLY.  By  Ella  Loraine  Dorset.  o  85 
THAT  FOOTBALL  GAME:  and  What  Came  of  It.  By  Father  Finn.  o  85 
THREE  GIRLS  AND  ESPECIALLY  ONE.     By  Marion  A.  Taggart.           o  40 

THREE  LITTLE  KINGS.     By  Emmy  Giehrl.  025 

TOM  PLAYFAIR;    or.  Making  a  Start.     By  Father  Finn.  o  85 

TOM'S  LUCKPOT.     By  Mary  T.  Waggaman.  o  45 

TREASURE  OF  NUGGET  MOUNTAIN.     By  M.  A.  Taggart.  o  8s 

VILLAGE  STEEPLE,  THE.  o  4s 

WAGER  OF  GERALD  O'ROURKE.  THE.  Finn-Thiele.  net.  o  35 
WINNETOU,  THE  APACHE  KNIGHT.     By  Marion  Ames  Taggart.           o  8s 

WRONGFULLY  ACCUSED.     By  William  Herchenbach.  o  40 

9 


NOVELS  AND  STORIES. 

BEZALEEL.     A  Christmas  Story.     By  Marion  Ames  Taggart.  net,  o  35 

"BUT  THY  LOVE  AND  THY  GRACE."     Rev.  F.  J.  Finn,  S.J.  i  00 

CIRCUS  RIDER'S  DAUGHTER,  THE.  A  Novel.  By  F.  v.  Brackel.  i  25 
CORINNE'S  VOW.     Waggaman.  i   25 

CONNOR   D'ARCY'S   STRUGGLES.     A   Novel.     By  Mrs.   W.  M.   Bertholds. 

I     25 

DION  AND  THE  SIBYLS.  A  Classic  Novel.  By  Miles  Keon.  Cloth,  i  25 
FABIOLA;  or.  The  Church  of  the  Catacombs.     By  Cardinal  Wiseman.     Popular 

Illustrated  Edition,  0.90;  Edition  de  luxe,  5  00 

FABIOLA'S   SISTERS.     A   Companion   Volume   to   Cardinal   Wiseman's   "Fab- 

iola."     By  A.  C.  Clarke.  i   25 

HEIRESS  OF  CRONENSTEIN,  THE.     By  the  Countess  Hahn-Hahn.  i    25 

HER  FATHER'S  DAUGHTER.     Katharine  Tynan  Hinkson.  i   25 

IDOLS;  or.  The  Secrets  of  the  Rue  Chaussee  d'Antin.     De  Navery.  i    25 

IN  THE  DAYS  OF  KING  HAL.     By  Marion  Ames  Taggart.  i   25 

LET  NO  MAN  PUT  ASUNDER.     A  Novel.     By  Josephine  Mari6.  i  00 

LINKED  LIVES.     A  Novel.     By  Lady  Gertrude  Douglas.  i   50 

MARCELLA  GRACE.     A  Novel.     By  Rosa  Mulholland.     Illustrated  Edition. 

I     25 

MISS  ERIN.     A  Novel.     By  M.  E.  Francis.  i   25 

MONK'S  PARDON,  THE.     A  Historical    Novel  of  the  Time  of  Philip   IV.  of 
Spain.     By  Raoul  de  Navery.  i   25 

MR.  BILLY  BUTTONS.     A  Novel.     By  Walter  Lecky.  i   25 

OUTLAW  OF  CAMARGUE,  THE.     A  Novel.     By  A.  de  Lamothe.  i   25 

PASSING  SHADOWS.     A  Novel.     By  Anthony  Yorke.  i  25 

PERE  MONNIER'S  WARD.     A  Novel.     By  Walter  Lecky.  i   as 

PRODIGAL'S  DAUGHTER,  THE.     By  Lelia  Hardin  Bu6g.  i  00 

ROMANCE  OF  A  PLAYWRIGHT.     By  Vte.  Henri  de  Bornier.  i  00 

ROUND    TABLE    OF    THE    REPRESENTATIVE    AMERICAN    CATHOLIC 
NOVELISTS.     Complete  Stories,  with  Biographies,  Portraits,  etc.     Cloth, 

I    50 
ROUND  TABLE  OF  THE  REPRESENTATIVE  FRENCH  CATHOLIC  NOV- 
ELISTS.    Complete  Stories,  with  Biographies,   Portraits,  etc.     Cloth,      i    50 
ROUND  TABLE  OF  THE  REPRESENTATIVE  GERMAN  CATHOLIC  NOV- 
ELISTS.    Illustrated.  i    50 
ROUND    TABLE    OF    THE   REPRESENTATIVE    IRISH    AND    ENGLISH 
CATHOLIC    NOVELISTS.     Complete    Stories,    BioRraphies.    Portraits,    etc. 
Cloth,                                                                                                                              I   50 
TRUE  STORY  OF  MASTER  GERARD,  THE.     By  Anna  T.  Sadlier.  i   25 
VOCATION    OF    EDWARD    CONWAY.     A    Novel.     By    Maurice    F.    Egan. 

I    25 
WOMAN  OF  FORTUNE,  A.     By  Christian  Reid.  i   25 

WORLD  WELL  LOST.     By  Esther  Robertson.  o  75 

LIVES  AND   HISTORIES. 

AUTOBIOGRAPHY  OF  ST.   IGNATIUS   LOYOLA      Edited  by  Rev.  J.  F.  X. 

O' Conor.     Cloth,  net,  i   25 

BIBLE  STORIES  FOR  LITTLE  CHILDREN.     Cloth.  o  20 

Paper,  o   10 

CHURCH  HISTORY.     Businger.  o  75 

HISTORIOGRAPHIA    ECCLESIASTICA    quam    Historiae    seriam  Solidamque 

Operam  Navantibus.  Accommodavit  Gttil.  Stang.  D.D.  net,  1   00 

HISTORY  OF  THE  CATHOLIC    CHURCH.     Brueck.     2  vols.,  net,  3  00 

10 


HISTORY  OF  THE  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.     By  John  Gilmary  Shea.  LL.D. 

I   50 
HISTORY   OF  THE   PROTESTANT   REFORMATION   IN   ENGLAND  AND 
IRELAND.     By  Wm.  CoBBETT.     Cloth,  net.oys 

LETTERS  OF  ST.  ALPHONSUS  LIGUORI.     By  Rev.  Eugene  Grimm,  C.SS.R. 
Centenary  Edition.     5  vols.,  each,  net,  i  25 

LIFE    OF    BLESSED    MARGARET    MARY.     By    Mgr.    Bougaud,    Bishop   of 
Laval.  net,  i   50 

LIFE  OF  CHRIST.     Illustrated.     By  Father  M.  v.  Cochem.  i    25, 

LIFE  OF  FR.  FRANCIS  POILVACHE,  C.SS.R.     Paper,  net,  o  20 

LIFE  OF  MOST  REV.  JOHN  HUGHES.     Brann.  net,  o  75 

LIFE    OF    MOTHER    FONTBONNE,  Foundress  of  the  Sisters  of  St.  Joseph  of 
Lyons.     By  Abbe  Rivaux.     Cloth,  net,  i    25 

LIFE  OF  OUR  LORD  AND  SAVIOUR  JESUS  CHRIST.     Cloth,  net,  5  00 

LIFE  OF  SISTER  ANNE  KATHERINE  EMMERICH,  of  the  Order  of  St.  Augus- 
tine. By  Rev.  Thomas  Wegener,  O.S.A.  net,  i  50 
LIFE  OF  ST.  ALOYSIUS  GONZAGA,  of  the  Society  of  Jesus.  By  Rev. 
J.  F.  X.  O'Conor,  S.J.  -  net,  o  75 
LIFE  OF  ST.  ANTHONY.  Ward.  Illustrated.  o  75 
LIFE  OF  ST.  CATHARINE  OF  SIENNA.  By  Edward  L.  Ayme,  M.D.  i  00 
LIFE  OF  ST.  CLARE  OF  MONTEFALCO.  Locke,  O.S.A.  net,  o  75 
LIFE  OF  MLLE.  LE  GRAS.  net,  i  25 
LIFE  OF  ST.  CHANTAL.  Bougatjd.  net,  4  00 
LIFE  OF  THE  BLESSED  VIRGIN.     Illustrated.     By  Rev.  B.  Rohner,  O.S.B. 

I    25 
LIGUORI,  ST.  ALPHONSUS.  WORKS.     Each.  net,  i    25 

LITTLE  LIVES  OF  SAINTS  FOR  CHILDREN.     Berthold.     111.     Cloth,    o  7.'5 
LITTLE  PICTORIAL  LIVES  OF  THE  SAINTS.     New.  cheap  edition,  i   00 

LIVES  OF  THE  SAINTS,  With  Reflections  and  Prayers  for  Every  Day.  i   50 

NAMES  THAT  LIVE  IN  CATHOLIC  HEARTS.     By  Anna  T.  Sadlier.       i   00 
OUR  LADY  OF  GOOD  COUNSEL  IN  GENAZZANO.     A  History  of  that  An- 
cient Sanctuary.     By  Anne  R.  Bennett -Gladstone.  o  75 
OUTLINES  OF  JEWISH  HISTORY,  From  Abraham  to  Our  Lord.     Rev.  F.  E. 
GiGOT,  S.S.                                                                                                                  net,  i    50 
OUTLINES  OF  NEW  TESTAMENT  HISTORY.     By  Rev.  F.  E.  Gigot,  S.S. 
Cloth,                                                                                                                             net,  1    50 
PICTORIAL  LIVES  OF  THE  SAINTS.     Cloth,  2  50 
REMINISCENCES  OF  RT.  REV.  EDGAR  P.  WADHAMS,  D.D.,  First  Bishop 
of  Ogdensburg.     By  Rev.  C.  A.  Walworth.                                           net,  i   00 
ST.  ANTHONY,  THE  SAINT  OF  THE  WHOLE  WORLD.     Rev.  Thomas  F. 
Ward.     Cloth,                                                                                                              o  75 
STORY  OF  THE  DIVINE  CHILD.     By  Very  Rev.  Dean  A.  A.  Lings.         o  75 
STORY  OF  JESUS.     Illustrated.                                                                                   o  60 
VICTORIES  OF  THE  MARTYRS.     By  St.  Alphonsus  de  Liguori.      net,  i    25 
VISIT  TO  EUROPE  AND  THE  HOLY  LAND.     By  Rev.  H.  Fairbanks,     i   50 
WIDOWS  AND  CHARITY.     Work  of  the  Women  of  Calvary  and  Its  Foundress. 
Abbe  Chaffanjon.     Paper,                                                                             net,  o  50 


THEOLOGY,    LITURGY,   SERMONS,   SCIENCE   AND 
PHILOSOPHY. 

ABRIDGED  SERMONS,  for  All  Sundays  of  the  Year.  By  St.  Alphonsus  de 
Liguori.     Centenary  Edition.     Grimm,  C.SS.R.  net,  1   25 

BLESSED  SACRAMENT,  SERMONS  ON  THE.  Especially  for  the  Forty 
Hours'  Adoration.  By  Rev.  J.  B.  Scheurer,  D.D.  Edited  by  Rev.  F.  X. 
Lasance.  net,  i   so 

II 


BREVE   COMPENDIUM   THEOLOGIAE   DOGMATICAE   ET  MORALIS  una 

cum    aliquibus    Notionibus    Theologiae    Canonicae    Liturgiae,    Pastoralis    et 

Mysticae,  ac  Philosophiae  Christianae.     Berthier.  net,   2   50 

BUSINESS  GUIDE   FOR   PRIESTS.     Stang,   D.D.  net,  o  85 

CHILDREN   OF   MARY,    SERMONS    FOR   THE.     From   the    ItaUan   of   Rev. 

F.  Callerio.     Edited  by  Rev.  R.  F.  Clarke,  S.J.  net,  1   50 

CHILDREN'S   MASSES,    SERMONS   FOR.     Frassinetti-Lings.  net,  i   50 

CHRISTIAN     ANTHROPOLOGY.       Sermons.       By     Rev.     John     Thein. 

net,   2  50 

CHRISTIAN   PHILOSOPHY:      God.     Driscoll.  net,  i   25 

CHRISTIAN    PHILOSOPHY.     A   Treatise   on   the    Human    Soul.     By   Rev.   J. 

T.  Driscoll,  S.T.L.  net,  i    25 

CHRIST  IN  TYPE  AND   PROPHECY.     Rev.  A.  J.   Maas,   S.J.,   Professor  of 

Oriental  Languages  in  Woodstock  College.      2  vols.,  net,  4  00 

CHURCH  ANNOUNCEMENT  BOOK.  net,  o   25 

CHURCH  TREASURER'S  PEW.     Collection  and  Receipt  Book.  net,  i   00 

COMMENTARIUM  IN   FACULTATES  APOSTOLICAS    EPISCOPIS   NECNON 

Vicariis    et    Praefectis    Apostolicis    per   Modum  Formularum    concedi    solitas 

ad   usum    Venerabilis    Cleri,   imprimis   Arnericani   concinnatum   ab   Antonio 

KoNiNGS,  C.SS.R.      Editio  quarto,  recognita  in  pluribus  emendata  et  aucta, 

curante  Joseph   Putzer,  C.SS.R.  net,  2   25 

COMPENDIUM  JURIS  CANONICI,  ad  usum  Cleri  et  Seminariorum  hujus  Re- 

gionis    accommodatum.  net,  2   00 

COMPENDIUM     SACRAE    LITURGIAE    JUXTA    RITUM    ROMANUM    UNA 

cum  Appendice  de  jure  Ecclesiastico  Particulari  in  America  Foederata  Sept. 

vigente  scripsit  P.  Innocentius  Wapelhorst,  O.S.F.     Editio  quinta  emen- 

datior.  net,  2   50 

COMPENDIUM    THEOLOGIAE    DOGMATICAE    ET    MORALIS.     Berthier. 

net,  2   so 

CONFESSIONAL,  THE.      By  the  Right  Rev.  A.  Roeggl,  D.D.  net,  i   00 

DE  PHILOSOPHIA  MORALI  PRAELECTIONES  quas  in  CoUegio  Georgiopo- 

litano  Soc.  Jesu,  Anno  1889-90  Habuit  P.  Nicolaus  Russo.     Editio  altera. 

net,  2  00 

ECCLESIASTICAL  DICTIONARY.     By  Rev.  John  Thein.  net,  5  00 

ELEMENTS  OF  ECCLESIASTICAL  LAW.     By  Rev.  S.  B.  Smith,  D.D. 

ECCLESIASTICAL  PERSONS.  net,  2  50 

ECCLESIASTICAL  PUNISHMENTS.  net,  2  50 

ECCLESIASTICAL  TRIALS.  net,  2  50 

FUNERAL  SERMONS.     By  Rev.  Aug.  Wirth,  O.S.B.     2  vols..  net,  2  00 

GENERAL   INTRODUCTION   TO   THE   STUDY   OF   HOLY   SCRIPTURES. 

By  Rev.  Francis  E.  Gigot,  S.S.     Cloth,  net,  2  00 

GOD  KNOWABLE  AND  KNOWN.     By  Rev.  Maurice  Ronavne.  S.J. 

net,  I    25 

GOOD  CHRISTIAN,  THE.     Rev.  J.  Allen,  D.D.     2  vols.,  net,  5  00 

HISTORY   OF   THE   MASS  AND   ITS  CEREMONIES   IN    THE    EASTERN 
AND  WESTERN  CHURCH.     By  Rev.  John  O'Brien.  net,  1   25 

HUNOLT'S  SERMONS.     12  vols.,  net,  25   00 

HUNOLT'S  SHORT  SERMONS,     s  vols.,  net,  10  00 

INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  STUDY  OP  THE  HOLY  SCRIPTURES.     Gigot. 

net,  2  00 

INTRODUCTION  TO   THE   STUDY   OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.     Vol.   I. 

Gigot.  ^^t,  1  50 

JESUS  LIVING  IN  THE  PRIEST.     Millet-Byrne.  net,  2  00 

LAST  THINGS,  SERMONS  ON  THE  FOUR.     Hunolt.     Translated  by  Rev. 

John  Allen,  D.D.     2  vols.,  net,  5  00 

LENTEN  SERMONS.     Edited  by  Augustine  Wirth,  O.S.B.  net,  2  00 

LIBER    STATUS     ANIMARUM;     or,    Parish    Census    Book.      Pocket    Edition, 

net,  o  25;  half  leather,  »et,  2  00 

12 


MORAL  PRINCIPLES  AND  MEDICAL  PRACTICE,  THE  BASIS  OF  MED- 
ICAL JURISPRUDENCE.  By  Rev.  Charles  Coppens,  S.J.,  Professor 
of  Medical  Jurisprudence  in  the  John  A.  Creighton  Medical  College,  Omaha, 
Neb.;  Author  of  Text-books  in  Metaphysics,  Ethics,  etc.  net,  i   50 

NATURAL  LAW  AND  LEGAL  PRACTICE.     Holaind,  S.J.  net,  i  75 

NEW  AND  OLD  SERMONS.     A  Repertory  of  Catholic  Pulpit  Eloquence.     Ed- 
ited by  Rev.  Augustine  Wirth,  O.S.B.     8  vols.,  net,  16  00 
OFFICE  OF  TENEBRAE,  THE.     Transposed  from  the  Gregorian  Chant  into 
Modem  Notation.     By  Rev.  J.  A.  McCallen,  S.S.  net,  o  50 
OUTLINES  OF  DOGMATIC  THEOLOGY.     By  Rev.  Sylvester  Jos.  Hunter, 
S.J.     3  vols.,                                                                                                         net,  4  50 
OUTLINES  OF  NEW  TESTAMENT  HISTORY.     Gigot.     Cloth,         net,  i   50 
PASTORAL  THEOLOGY.     By  Rev.  Wm.  Stang,  D.D.                              net,  1  50 
PENANCE.  SERMONS  ON.     By  Rev.  Francis   Hunolt,  S.J.     Translated  by 
Rev.  John  Allen.     2  vols.,  net,  5  00 
PENANCE,   SEVEN   LENTEN   SERMONS.     Wirth.     Paper,  net,  o  25 
PENITENT  CHRISTIAN,  THE.     Sermons.     By  Rev.  F.  Hunolt.     Tran.^lated 
by  Rev.  John  Allen,  D.D.     2  vols.,                                                            net,  5  00 
PEW-RENT  RECEIPT  BOOK.                                                                         net,  i  00 
PHILOSOPHIA,  DE,  MORALI.     Russo.                                                        net,  2  00 
POLITICAL  AND  MORAL  ESSAYS.     Rickaby,  S.J.                                  net,  i   50 
PRAXIS    SYNODALIS.     Manuale    Synodi     Diocesanae    ac     Provincialis    Cele- 
brandae.                                                                                                                  net,  o  60 
REGISTRUM  BAPTISMORUM.                                                                         net,  3  5° 
REGISTRUM    MATRIMONIORUM.                                                                 net,  3  50 
RELATION  OF  EXPERIMENTAL  PSYCHOLOGY  TO  PHILOSOPHY.     Mgr. 
DE  Mercier.                                                                                                          net,  o  35 
RITUALE    COMPENDIOSUM    seu    Ordo    Administrandi    quaedam    Sacramenta 
et  alia  Officia  Ecclesiastica  Rite   Peragendi  ex  Rituali  Romano,  novissime 
edito  desumptas.                                                                                                  net,  o  90 
ROSARY,  SERMONS  ON  THE  MOST  HOLY.     Frings.                            net,  i  00 
SACRED  HEART,  SIX  SERMONS  ON  DEVOTION  TO  THE.     By  Rev.  Dr. 
E.  Bierbaum.                                                                                                       net,  o  60 
SANCTUARY    BOYS'     ILLUSTRATED    MANUAL.     Embracing    the    Ceremo- 
nies of  the  Inferior  Ministers  at  Low  Mass,  High  Mass,  Solemn  High  Mass, 
Vespers,  Asperges,  Benediction  of  the  Blessed  Sacrsment  and  Absolution  fol 
the  Dead.     By  Rev.  J.  A.  McCallen,  S.S.                                                  net,  o  50 
SERMON  MANUSCRIPT  BOOK.                                                                      net,  2  00 
SERMONS.     Hunolt.     12  vols.,                                                                      net,  2r  00 
SERMONS,  ABRIDGED,  FOR  SUNDAYS.     Liguori.                               net,  1   25 
SERMONS  FOR  CHILDREN  OF  MARY.     Callerio.                               net,  i   50 
SERMONS  FOR  CHILDREN'S  MASSES.     Frassinetti-Lings.                net,  i   50 
SERMONS  FOR  THE  SUNDAYS  AND  CHIEF  FESTIVALS  OF  THE  ECCLE- 
SIASTICAL YEAR.     With  Two  Courses  of  Lenten  Sermons  and  a  Triduum 
tor  the  Forty  Hours.     By  Rev.  J.  Pottgeisser,  S.J.     2  vols.,           net,  2  50 
SERMONS  FROM  THE  LATINS.     Baxter.                                                 net,  2  00 
SERMONS,  FUNERAL.     Wirth.     2  vols.,                                                    net,  2  00 
SERMONS,  HUNOLT'S,  SHORT.     5  vols.,                                                   net,  10  00 
SERMONS,   LENTEN.     Wirth.                                                                         net,  2  00 
SERMONS,  NEW  AND  OLD.     Wirth.     8  vols.                                         net,  i6  00 
SERMONS  ON   DEVOTION  TO  THE   SACRED   HEART.     Bierbaum. 

net,  o   75 
SERMONS  ON  OUR  LORD,  THE  BLESSED  VIRGIN,  AND  THE  SAINTS. 
Hunolt.     2  vols.,  net,  5  00 

SERMONS  ON  PENANCE.     Hunolt.     2  vols.,  net,  5  00 

SERMONS  ON  THE  BLESSED  SACRAMENT.     Scheurer-Lasance.     net,  i   50 
SERMONS  ON  THE  CHRISTIAN  VIRTUES.    By  Rev.  F.  Hunolt,  S.J.     Trans- 
lated by  Rev.  John  Allen.     2  vols.,  net,  5  00 

13 


SERMONS  ON  THE  FOUR  LAST  THINGS.     Hunolt.     2  vols.,  net,  5  00 

SERMONS  ON  THE  ROSARY.     Frings.  net,  i   00 

SERMONS  ON  THE  DIFFERENT  STATES  OF  LIFE.     By  Rev.  F.  Hunolt, 

S.J.     Translated  by  Rev.  John  Allen.     2  vols.,  net,  5  00 

SERMONS  ON  THE  SEVEN  DEADLY  SINS.     By  Rev.  F.  Hunolt.  S.J.     2 

vols.     Translated  by  Rev.  John  Allen,  D.D.  net,  5  00 

SERMONS,  SEVEN  LENTEN,  ON  PENANCE.     Wirth.     Paper,  net,  o  25 

SHORT  SERMONS.     By  Rev.  F.  Hunolt,  S.J.     5  vols.,  10  00 

SHORT  SERMONS  FOR  LOW  MASSES.     Schouppe,  S.J.  net,  i   25 

SOCIALISM    EXPOSED   AND    REFUTED.     Cathrein.  net,  1  00 

SYNOPSIS     THEOLOGIAE     DOGMATICAE     AD     MENTEM     S.    THOMAE 

AQUINATIS,  hodiernis  moribus  accommodata,  auctore  Ad.  Tanquerey,  S.S. 

3  vols.,  net,  s    25 

SYNOPSIS  THEOLOGIAE  MORALIS  ET  PASTORALIS.  Vol.  I.  Tanque- 
rey. net,  I  75 
THEOLOGIA  DOGMATICA  SPECIALIS.  Tanquerey.  2  vols.,  net,  3  50 
THEOLOGIA  FUNDAMENTALIS.  Tanquerey.  net,  i  75 
THEOLOGIA   MORALIS   NOVISSIMI   ECCLESIAE   DOCTORIS  ALPHONSI. 

In  Compendium  Redacta,  et  Usui  Venerabilis  Cleri  Americani  accommodata. 

Auctore  Rev.  A.   Konincs,  C.SS.R.     Editio  septima,  auctior  et  novis  curis 

expolitior  curante  Henrico  Kuper,  C.SS.R.     2  vols  ,  net,  4  00 

TWO-EDGED  SWORD.     By  Rev.  Augustine  Wirth,  O.S.B.     Paper,  net,  o   2s 

VADE    MECUM    SACERDOTUM,  continens  Preces  ante  et  post    Missam,  mo- 

dum    providendi    infirmos,    necnon    multas    Benedictionum    Formulas.     Cloth, 

net,  0.25;  morocco  flexible,  net,  o  50 

VIRTUES,  SERMONS  ON  THE  CHRISTIAN.  Hunolt.  2  vols..  net,  5  oc 
WHAT   CATHOLICS   HAVE   DONE   FOR   SCIENCE.     With   Sketches   of  the 

Great  Catholic  Scientists.     By  Rev.  Martin  S.  Brennan.  i  00 

MISCELLANEOUS. 

A  GENTLEMAN.     By  M.  F.  Egak,  LL.D.  o  75 

A  LADY.     Manners  and  Social  Usages.     By  Lelia  Hardin  Bugg.  o  75 

BENZIGER'S   MAGAZINE.     The  Popular  Catholic  Family  Magazine.     Subscrip- 
tion per  year,  2  00 
BONE  RULES;    or,  Skeleton  of  English  Grammar.     By  Rev.  J.  B.  Tabb,  A.M. 

o  50 
CANTATA  CATHOLICA.     By  B.  H.  F.  Hellebusch.  net,  2  00 

CATECHISM  OF  FAMILIAR  THINGS.  Their  History,  and  the  Events  which 
Led  to  Their  Discovery.  With  a  Short  Explanation  of  some  of  the  Principal 
Natural  Phenomena.  i   00 

CATHOLIC  HOME  ANNUAL.     Stories  by  Best  Writers.  o  25 

CORRECT  THING  FOR  CATHOLICS,  THE.     By  Lelia  Hardin  Bugg.     o  75 
ELOCUTION  CLASS.     A  Simplification  of  the  Laws  and  Principles  of  Expres- 
sion.    By  Eleanor  O'Grady.  net,  o  50 
EVE  OF  THE  REFORMATION,  THE.     An  Historical  Essay  on  the  Religious. 
Literarv,    and   Social   Condition  of   Christendom,  with  Special   Reference   to 
Germany  and  England,  from  the  Beginning  of  the  Latter  Half  of  the  Fifteenth 
Century  to  the  Outbreak  of  the  Religious  Revolt.     By  the  Rev.  Wm.  Stang. 
Paper,                                                                                                                      net,  o   25 
GAMES  OF  CATHOLIC  AMERICAN  AUTHORS: 
PICTORIAL  GAME  OF  CATHOLIC  AMERICAN  AUTHORS. 

Series  A,  «^^  o  iS 

Series  B,  net,  o  15 

GAMES    OF    QUOTATIONS    FROM    CATHOLIC   AMERICAN   AUTHORS. 
Series  I.,  net,  o   15 

Series  II.,  net,  o   i^ 

Series  III.,  net,  q   15 

GUIDE  FOR  SACRISTANS  and  Others  Having  Charge  of  the  Altar  and  Sanc- 
tuary.    By  a  Member  of  an  Altar  Society.  net,  o  75 

14 


HYMN-BOOK  OF  SUNDAY-SCHOOL  COMPANION.  o  35 

HOW  TO  GET  ON.     By  Rev.  Bernard  Feeney.  i  oo 

LITTLE  FOLKS'  ANNUAL,     o.io;  per  loo,  7  50 

ON  CHRISTIAN  ART.     By  Edith  Healy.  o  50 

READINGS  AND  RECITATIONS  FOR  JUNIORS.     O'Grady.  net,  o  50 

SELECT    RECITATIONS    FOR    CATHOLIC    SCHOOLS    AND    ACADEMIES. 

Bv  Eleanor  O'Grady.  i  00 

STATISTICS  CONCERNING  EDUCATION  IN  THE  PHILIPPINES.   Hedges. 

o  10 
SURSUM  CORDA.     Hymns.     Cloth,  0.25;  per  100,  15  00 

Paper,  0.15;  per  100,  10  00 

SURSUM  CORDA.     With  English  and  German  Text.  ■  o  45 


THE    BEST  READING  MATTER.  7OO-80O    ILLUSTRATIONS    A   YEAlv. 

BENZIGER'S    MAGAZINE. 

The    Popular    Catholic    Family    Monthly. 

Recommended  by  50  Archbishops  and  Bishops. 

SUBSCRIPTION  PRICE, $2.00  A  YEAR. 

Contains  :  Novels  and  Stories,  Special  Articles,  Current  Events,  Father  Finn's  Comer. 

Woman''s  Department,  Games  and  Amusements  fo/  the  Young,  etc., 

and  700-800  illustrations  a  year. 


AGENTS    WANTED   IN    EVERY   TOWN.       WRH  K    FOR   TERMS. 


IS 


RETURN    CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT                  ^ 

TOi-^^    202  Main  Library                                        ■ 

LOAN  PERIOD  1 
HOME  USE 

2                       ; 

1 

4 

5                                  ( 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS                                                          ■ 
Renewals  and  Recharges  may  be  made  4  days  prior  to  the  due  date.               ■ 
Books  may  be  Renewed  by  calling        642-3405                                                         I 

DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW                       1 

OCT  19  1993 

imo  im-xw. 

J 

Jul  ?-,'09. 

- 

^ 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  BERKELEY        ■ 
FORMNO.  DD6                              BERKELEY,  CA  94720            ^        ■ 

U.C.BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


YC146577 


